Urban Regions: Ecology and Planning Beyond the City

This page intentionally left blank Urban Regions Ecology and Planning Beyond the City Natural systems and their human...

Author: Richard T. T. Forman

142 downloads 1394 Views 13MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

This page intentionally left blank

Urban Regions Ecology and Planning Beyond the City Natural systems and their human uses are of central importance in urban regions, where diverse greenspaces and built spaces of essentially equal value spatially intertwine. With land planning, socioeconomics, and natural systems as foundations, this book combines urban planning and ecological science in examining urban regions. Writing for graduate students, academic researchers, planners, conservationists, and policy makers, and with the use of informative urban-region color maps, Richard Forman compares 38 urban regions from 32 nations, including London, Chicago, Ottawa, Brasilia, Cairo, Beijing, Bangkok, Canberra, and a major case study of the Greater Barcelona Region. Alternative patterns of urbanization spread (including sprawl) are evaluated from the perspective of nature and people, and land-use principles extracted from landscape ecology, transportation, and hydrology are stated. Good, bad, and interesting spatial patterns for creating sustainable land mosaics are pinpointed, and urban regions are considered in broader contexts, from climate change to biodiversity loss, disasters, and sense of place. Ri c h a r d T. T. Fo r m a n is Harvard University’s Professor of Advanced Environmental Studies in Landscape Ecology. Previously at the University of Wisconsin and Rutgers University, he is an American Association for the Advancement of Science Fellow and recipient of the Lindback Award for Teaching Excellence as well as of honorary degrees and medals in the USA and internationally.

Urban Regions Ecology and Planning Beyond the City Richard T. T. Forman Harvard University

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS

Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521854467 © Cambridge University Press 2008 This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provision of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published in print format 2008

ISBN-13 978-0-511-40977-6

eBook (NetLibrary)

ISBN-13 978-0-521-85446-7

hardback

ISBN-13 978-0-521-67076-0

paperback

Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of urls for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.

Dedicated to Sabrina Forman Heim and her family, Karl, Brianna, Matthew

Contents

Foreword xi Foreword xiii Preface xvii Acknowledgments xxi

1 Regions and land mosaics 1 A framework 1 Terms and concepts to reveal urban regions 6 Regions 11 Land-mosaic perspective and landscape ecology 16 Spatial scales and their attributes 18

2 Planning land 27 Planning and land management 27 Conservation planning 33 Planned cities 40 Urban-region planning 45

3 Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns 51 Growth, regulatory, and ecological economics 51 Economics in time, space, and footprints 59 Social patterns 66 Culture 73

4 Natural systems and greenspaces 80 Ecosystem, community, and population ecology 82 Freshwater and marine coast ecology 93

vii

viii

Contents Earth and soil 99 Microclimate and air pollutants 102 Greenspaces 105

5 Thirty-eight urban regions 113 Selecting cities, determining boundaries, mapping regions 113 Key spatial attributes 119 Thirty-eight urban regions mapped 125 Place-name synopses of the regions 125 Broad patterns of the urban-region set 134

6 Nature, food, and water 138 Spatial analysis for patterns 138 Nature in urban regions 142 Food in urban regions 150 Water in urban regions 155 7 Built systems, built areas, and whole regions 164 Natural systems within and next to built areas 165 Built systems 168 Built areas 177 Whole regions 189

8 Urbanization models and the regions 198 Land-change patterns and models 199 Four urbanization models 206 Models applied to case studies 211 Urbanization options evaluated with 18 attributes and 38 regions 215

9 Basic principles for molding land mosaics 223 Patch sizes, edges, and habitats 224 Natural processes, corridors, and networks 229 Transportation modes 232 Communities and development 234 Land mosaics and landscape change 239

10 The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic 243 Perspective and approach 244 Nature, food, and water 248 Built areas and systems 260 Three plan options for the region 268 Reﬂections two years later 274

Contents

11 Gathering the pieces 282 Settings and forms of urban regions 282 Ability to extrapolate the Barcelona solutions 290 Local communities, ecology, and planning 295 Good, bad, and interesting patterns in urban regions 304

12 Big pictures 315 Garden-to-gaia, urban sustainability, disasters 315 Climate change, species extinction, water scarcity 325 Big-ideas--regulation--treaties--policy--governance, megacities, sense of place 334 Awakening to the urban tsunami 343

Appendices 346 References 352 Index 380 Color plate section can be found between pages 118 and 119

ix

Foreword

Encountering the title of this book by Richard Forman, my ﬁrst reaction was one of surprise. It is commonplace, of course, that cities are embedded in natural systems, but the modern city seems such a triumph of modern technology over the constraints of nature that one can easily understand why urban planners have rarely found it necessary to spend much time talking with urban ecologists -- or, to state it another way, why ecology and urban planning have remained quite separate domains of inquiry and action in the modern division of labor. Ecology, a branch of biological sciences, strives to understand relationships of interdependence in the natural world, and (while not at heart activist) at times to devise strategies for their preservation. As such, of course, it informs environmental regulators and thereby places some constraints on development activity. Urban planning, on the other hand, exists to provide analysis in the service of action, and its principal concerns historically have been economic -to pursue and facilitate development while striving as well to preserve and enhance the market value of existing property investments. Planners have other concerns as well, to be sure, such as improved public health, social equity, and an attractive public realm -- all of which have vital ecological dimensions. So one would be hard-pressed indeed to ﬁnd a planner who disagreed with the proposition that good plans must be ecologically sound. This agreement has traditionally had a ritualistic quality, however, in that, with rare exceptions, planners have viewed ecological values mainly as constraints -- to be addressed late in their analyses, particularly at the behest of environmental regulators -rather than at the very core of their mission. And they have rarely viewed ecologists as indispensable participants in their deliberations from the outset. Richard Forman would change all that, and the argument he lays out in this volume is compelling. Though modern technologies are dazzling, he observes, having enabled us to separate urban residents from their sources of

xi

xii

Foreword nourishment, potable water, and even jobs, by greater distances than would ever have been imaginable in earlier times, the ‘‘tsunami” of urban growth now threatens widespread disaster. With three billion people living in urban areas, and two billion more expected within the next quarter-century, with global warming, with energy demand rising more rapidly than energy production (the latter, moreover, often with devastating environmental effects), and with the continuing depletion of fresh water supplies and biodeversity -- we seem to be racing beyond the capacities of our technological ingenuity to shield us from the natural limits of our environment. It is past time, in short, for urban planners and policy makers to recognize ecological health as the single most urgent value to be served by urban planning -- without which all the others are likely to prove illusory before too many more decades pass. Forman’s analysis is global, greatly enhancing its power. He examines 38 regions in 32 countries, representing most of the variety of large cities and regions throughout the world, and reports as well on a detailed case example of ecologically focused urban planning in Barcelona, a pioneering effort that he personally led in 2001--2002. The latter provides a truely eye-opening example of big-picture planning, carried out at the behest of Barcelona’s mayor and chief planner, to preserve the critical natural assets of that region and direct its development for generations to come in ways that minimize environmental degradation. What emerges clearly from this exercise is that there need not be a major conﬂict between the objectives of ecological health and economic development, but that one had better focus on the ecology early on if there is to be much hope of reconciling them in the end. In brief, though written by an ecologist, this is very much a book for urban planners, policy-makers, and all others who care seriously about the future of urban life on this planet. Moving to implement Forman’s ideas will be a formidable challenge indeed, even in those very rare enlightened jurisdisctions with planning traditions comparable to Barcelona’s, and vastly more so everywhere else. But global transformations invariably begin in the realm of ideas. And Forman here lays out a very big one. Planners and urban policy-makers everywhere, take heed! Alan A. Altshuler Ruth and Frank Stanton Professor in Urban Policy and Planning, Harvard University ∗

∗

Also: formerly Secretary, Massachussetts Department of Transportation; formerly Director, Taubman Center for State and Local Government, Kennedy School of Government; formerly Dean of the Faculty of Design, Harvard University.

Foreword

When Daniel Burnham exhorted the planners of the early twentieth century to ‘‘make no small plans,” ecology was not something that very many urban planners knew much about. Indeed, the ecology of that time probably seemed irrelevant to planners, because it had little to say about humans in ecosystems, or even about the structure and function of broad-scale landscapes. These concerns were late inventions in ecology, but they have ﬁnally emerged and come together to generate a sound and growing body of knowledge that relates to urban mosaics as ecological systems. The new knowledge and perspectives of landscape ecology and urban ecological studies bring the science of ecology, the practice of urban planners, and the needs of dwellers in urban regions to an unprecedented threshold of truly ecological planning at regional scales. Richard Forman has written a satisfyingly original and compelling book to carry us over that threshold. As an ecologist I ﬁnd several things particularly exciting about this book. It identiﬁes the big issues and concerns about urbanization at the beginning of the ﬁrst urban century -- the century in which humans become numerically an urban species. The growth, intensiﬁcation, and global spread of urbanization are staggering. Ecology must ﬁnd a way to engage with this wave, and not retreat in its face. With the rapid changes in urban systems, they take on new forms and establish new interactions with their regions. The old assumptions about the forms of cities, and the ecological implications of those forms will not support effective ecological research or interaction between ecologists and planners in the future. Forman recognizes the signiﬁcance of the amazing transformations our urbanized world is experiencing, and translates them into a conceptual language that can help bring ecological knowledge to bear in the design and management of the Earth’s changing urban face. Ecologists have much to learn from this, and it provides a way to interact with planners

xiii

xiv

Foreword who are confronting and dealing with the novel urban patterns around the world. Perhaps most pleasing to an ecologist is the fact that the ecology here is up-to-date and sound. This is no mere urban ecology by analogy with the patterns of processes outside the human realm. Rather this book articulates, in clear and relevant ways, the major principles that must guide the application of real scientiﬁc ecology to cities and their regions. Also important to see here is the fact that generalizations are couched within taxonomies of urban regions that can identify the constraints governing their applicability. These generalizations are couched so that they should not be inappropriately applied, or over extended. This book will be a key tool in the important and widely recognized work of bridging between contemporary ecology and urban planning. The ‘‘worked example” of plans for the Barcelona region in the context of examining the ecological opportunities and constraints for 38 metropolises around the world is a very powerful guide for truly ecologically based regional planning. Ecology has too often been a weak or small tool in planning. Forman shows us how strong and central it can be. At the same time, the reader will ﬁnd respect for both ecology and planning, based on long experience in education and research in both. This is a brave and necessary book, which does its work with both scientiﬁc clarity and the poetry or keen observation and sensitivity to the humanities and the social realm. I’m ﬁnishing my notes for this piece while descending into the Johannesburg, South Africa airport. Below me sprawls a region of immense natural resources, a beacon of social hope, a locus of economic power, a cultural engine. It contains an old center, quiet suburbs from the last century, gleaming new suburbs with their business and entertainment districts, and the crowded townships. There are the mine shafts, spoils, and cooling towers of the mineral industry; there are farms, and the green leafy canopy of jacaranda blooming over some neighborhoods. Forman’s book tells us how to truly bring ecology and the built and social mosaics together to envision how a metropolis such as this can evolve sustainably in the future. This book also suggests how to deal with the dynamism of Baltimore, Maryland, a very different region where much of my ecological work now takes place. But it also gives us an important way to deal with the different dynamics of the next new city -- perhaps not yet named -- to be established in China. The deep regional perspective and sound ecological principles articulated and put into action in this book make us think about Burnham’s exhortation in a different light. Whatever one thinks about the value or success of big plans over this last 100 years, the vision of this book suggests that it is time to make

Foreword big plans again, but to do so on a regional, landscape ecological base -- the real ecology -- encapsulated in this book. Steward T. A. Pickett Distinguished Senior Scientist, Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Millbrook, New York Director, Baltimore Ecosystem Study, Long Term Ecological Research

xv

Preface

I grew up in a world of rural nations where forests and farmland seemed inﬁnite. Now most are urban nations. Indeed, at this moment the globe zooms over a threshold; half of us (three billion people) now aggregate in and around cities. Yet the big change lies just ahead. In a single generation two billion more people are expected to join the urban population. Where will they live their lives? In much bigger and more numerous urban regions? Next door? Like an urban tsunami, easily visible today, we sweep swiftly and powerfully across our ﬁnite land. For years I asked people in audiences to visualize the place where they grew up, and indicate whether it is better or worse now. Minds instantly left the room, speeding through images of memorable neighborhoods, glorious experiences, tough times, meaningful spots, and inspiring nature. Upon rapid return, virtually all audiences on different continents agreed: 80 to 90 % of their formative landscapes are worse today. Yet this trend could be turned around. Incremental solutions crowd our plate, while promising big-picture solutions increasingly appear, often ready for serious evaluation or action. One of the great challenges of history has appeared, the giant urban region. At the center, a huge city population depends fundamentally and daily on resources that are out of sight, out of the city. An engineering and architectural marvel, the city expands at its edges or along transportation corridors or dispersed as sprawl. Too often expansion devours the city’s closest and best resources, impoverishing both the land and the people. Proximity is value, as transportation cost, scarce clean water, local food sources, and tourism/recreational access emphasize. Aquifers supply clean water, greenways support walkers and wildlife, and ﬂoodplain vegetation reduces ﬂood damage. Natural systems, from groundwater and wetlands to riparian zones and wooded parks, provide these valuable resources to society.

xvii

xviii

Preface Four motifs with ever-changing harmonies cascade through the book’s pages: (1) urban regions, rather than cities or all-built metropolitan areas, are the key big objects today and in our future; (2) natural systems, or simply nature, and human uses of them in an urban region are of major importance; (3) all regional characteristics are changing, driven by growing populations, more cities, and diverse urbanization patterns; (4) using principles and a rich array of existing solutions, society can signiﬁcantly improve every distinctive urban region. The book title provides further clues to content. ‘‘Urban region” highlights the 150 to 200 km diameter (90 to 125 mile) area where a major city and its surroundings interact to effectively form a functional region. ‘‘Ecology” refers to interactions between plants/animals and the physical environment, though often the slightly broader concept of natural systems is used. ‘‘Planning,” as used here, is about product (rather than process), the tangible arrangement of human pieces and natural systems that forms the big picture. ‘‘Beyond the city” highlights patterns in the ring around the city. This book does not focus on the city, or all-built metropolitan area, or urban history, or socioeconomic dimensions, or mainstream urban planning, or town planning, or housing developments, or the methods of developing plans, or the implementation of plans, though, of course, bits of each appear. Finally, the book’s perspective is global. What are the beneﬁts, and costs, of creating a globe with a scatter of huge growing urban powerhouses? Concentrating people helps protect natural and agricultural resources elsewhere. Economic growth often occurs in growing cities. Specialized resources such as the opera house and biotechnology center appear. But seemingly intractable problems multiply for cities, surrounding towns, villages, and farms. Natural systems are degraded, even eliminated. Floods and air pollutants are harder to control. As cities grow outward, alas, we keep traveling further and importing more of our needs, at greater cost. A prominent sign adorns my ofﬁce: ‘‘Think Globally, Plan Regionally, and Then Act Locally.” As a philosophic foundation for a 1995 piece on land management and planning, I was thinking mainly of geographic regions. I now realize the vision especially applies to urban regions. Big ideas -- nationalism, hard-work-makes-productive-land, economic growth, environmentalism -- evolve, dominate, and are transformed or replaced over time. Will urban-region planning inevitably appear in this overlapping sequence? If so, where will the giant solutions be found? Unfortunately today most planners avoid emphasizing natural systems, and most ecologists avoid studying urban regions. That leaves a near void of directly useful models. Yet both ecologists and urban planners, along with economists, engineers, and architects, are wellequipped to contribute. Who would want to live in a major area planned or designed by only one of the group? Lack of planning might be better. But the

Preface full range of expertise would be best. Indeed, ﬁtting together small pieces makes incremental progress, while overall success or failure depends fundamentally on addressing the big picture and the long term. Why would I, with roots in ecology, write this book? In essence three foundations suddenly came neatly together. One is ecology, especially landscape ecology’s spatial scientiﬁc focus on land and natural systems at the human scale. The second is more than two decades of Harvard teaching and learning from planners, designers, engineers, social scientists, humanists, and scientists. The third foundation is an intensive 15-month project developing a land-mosaic plan for the Greater Barcelona Region. Highlighting low-proﬁle big problems, offering tangible steps for improvement, and outlining robust frameworks for real solutions are what ecologists in their ﬁnest hour do for society. Imagine, one afternoon the head planner for Barcelona, a major European city, telephoned saying surprisingly that he had been reading my books and articles, and then two weeks later appeared during a family Thanksgiving holiday. We talked and sensed mutual respect. He asked me, in effect, to do an ecological and conceptual plan analysis for his whole urban region based on my recent book, the only model that made good sense to him. ‘‘But I’m a scientist, not a planner.” Good. ‘‘I’ve hardly ever been to Spain.” No problem. ‘‘I’ve never been to Barcelona.” Fine. ‘‘I’ll have to think about it.” In three weeks you should meet the Mayor and get started. After an awkward seven-month dance I started. But how does one start? I never found a model or a real city plan highlighting natural systems and their human uses as major components, though valuable pieces did accumulate over time. With an impressive team in a magical place, the outlines of a promising land mosaic emerged. Writing this book for the wide range of people interested in urban areas, plus the equally diverse array interested in ecological science, is tough. Ecologists are overwhelmingly rural, natural systems, plants/animals, water, and management oriented. In contrast, planners are overwhelmingly urban, economics, social, people, and policy oriented. Success also means reaching perceptive educated citizens who will live in, care about, and depend on tomorrow’s urban region. The chapters ﬂow cascade-like through the book, until expanding with broader visions at the end. An unusual array of important foundations (Chapters 1 to 4) launches the reader into a close-up of 38 urban regions of large-to-small cities worldwide (Chapter 5). Numerous characteristics of nature, food, and water, plus built systems, built areas, and whole regions, are highlighted (Chapters 6 to 7). Then alternative urbanization models, also using many assays, identify good and bad patterns of change (Chapter 8). More pieces are added -- a set of basic principles, the detailed Barcelona case study -- and gathered together as key components for a land mosaic (Chapters 9 to 11). Finally,

xix

xx

Preface urban-region ecology and planning beyond the city is analyzed in the context of broader big-picture perspectives (Chapter 12). Lots of promising patterns and trends, plus pitfalls to avoid, emerge for the thousands of distinctive urban regions worldwide. But no single solution is proposed, other than urban-region planning for natural systems and us. Rather, a richness of spatial patterns and principles are portrayed together, ready for readers to arrange, add their own ingredients, and create a land mosaic framework or vision for an urban region. The patterns represent handles for wise planning. With ﬁre in the belly and a dash of optimism, I expect to see more of the world on a trajectory meshing nature and people so they both thrive . . . and I can’t wait. In addressing the great urban-region challenge of history, this book simply helps get the window open a crack to grasp broader horizons. Insights, solutions, big problems, and surprises lie in wait for the reader. Land as capital, heritage, nature, as investment, inspiration, home. All ﬁnite, all requiring care. So, add planning and ecology as wisdom, for nature’s future, our future. Richard T. T. Forman

Acknowledgments

I deeply appreciate an impressive group of colleagues and friends who provided key insights that signiﬁcantly shaped and broadened my thinking on the ecology and planning of urban regions: scientists, Sito Alarcon, Michael W. Binford, Mark Brenner, Barney Foran, David R. Foster, Robert L. France, David Lindenmayer, Xavier Mayor Farguel, Robert I. McDonald, Mark J. McDonnell, Marc Montlleo, Steward T. A. Pickett, Ferran Roda, and Ross W. Wein; planners and designers, Josep Acebillo, Alan Berger, Paul Cote, Patrick Curran, Susan Feinstein, Anna M. Hersperger, Peter Pollock, Eva Serra, Carl Steinitz, Patrick Troy, François Vigier, Christina von Haaren, Yang Rui; social scientists and humanists, Alan Altshuler, Joan Clos, Jose Gomez-Ibañez, Jerald Kayden, John H. Mitchell, John C. V. Pezzey, Kate Rigby, Peter P. Rogers, Sam Bass Warner, Jr.; and engineers, Daniel Sperling, Hein van Bohemen. I am also grateful to many people who have graciously aided my attempts to understand speciﬁc cities and urban regions: Arthur Adeya, Christian Albert, Javier A. Arce-Nazario, John Beardsley, Alessandra Cazzola, Caroline Chen, Susan Curtin, Thomas Curtin, Gareth Doherty, Guido Ferrara, Erica Field, Susan L. Forman, Janet Franklin, Randy Gragg, Wolfgang Haber, Bryant E. Harrell, Elizabeth F. Harrell, Jock Herron, John P. Holdren, Michael C. Houck, Huang Guoping, Dorothee Imbert, Hussein A. Isack, Mikiko Ishikawa, Marianne Jorgensen, Hong Joo Kim, Young Min Kim, Wayne Klockner, Jennifer Leaning, Robert L. Liberty, David Lindenmayer, Roy A. Lubke, Taco Iwashima Matthews, Mark J. McDonnell, Yoshiki Mishima, Summer Montacute, Emanuela Morelli, Orhun Muratoglu, Elizabeth Nguyen, Laurie Olin, Grant Pearsell, George F. Peterken, Anchalee Phaosawasdi, Narcis Prat, Jennifer Claire Provost, Rodolpho Ramina, Maria Rieradevall, Ferran Roda, Carme Rosell Pages, Brooke Rosenthal, Peter G. Rowe, Sumeeta Srinivasan, Denis A. Saunders, Mario Schjetnan, Mack Scoggin, Simon Shaw, Robbert Snep, Carl Steinitz, Harry Stelfox, Frederick J. Swanson, François Vigier, Kotchakorn Voraakhom, Ross W. Wein, Joseph Wheeler,

xxi

xxii

Acknowledgments Verona Wheeler, Emily Wilson, Wu Yue, Yang Lu (Gavin), Yang Rui, Yu Kongjian, and Zhu Yu-Fan and Yao. It is a pleasure to acknowledge students and colleagues at the Harvard University Graduate School of Design, The Harvard Forest, and the Centre for Resources and Environmental Studies at Australian National University for the intellectual catalysis from which this book emerged. Also, I thank the leaders of two impressive organizations, Barcelona Regional and Editorial Gustavo Gili, for permission to reproduce material from my 2004 book, Mosaico territorial para la region metropolitana de Barcelona. Five key people have made especially important contributions to the pages of this book. Patrick Curran produced scores of large, high-quality satellite images for urban regions around the world, including those that underlie much of this book. Eva Serra de la Figuera offered planning experience and reworked the rich geographic-information-system maps of Barcelona until they were just right. Taco Iwashima Matthews once again contributed her designer magic to create the wonderful information-rich multicolor maps of the 38 urban regions explored in this book. Finally, Lawrence Buell and Barbara L. Forman have contributed in countless ways, from fount of ideas to problem-solver, friendly reviewer, and facilitator, par excellence. I warmly thank each of you.

1

Regions and land mosaics

Imagine a group of rhinos rampaging through a restaurant, while we concentrate on adjusting the napkins, ﬁlling a glass, and brushing up some crumbs. So it seems on land, we focus on our house lots, our housing developments, sometimes our towns, while giant forces are degrading, even transforming, our valuable land. These are new giants, unseen in history. We notice their ﬁngers, an ear, a heel, but rarely see them. Who are they? What’s happening to the land? Should we keep ﬁxing the little pieces and hand our land to the giants? Or could we raise our vision . . . and do something? This leadoff chapter provides a set of unusual regional and land lenses through which to view urban regions, a key analytic foundation for later chapters. Chapters 2 to 4 add the other major foundations: land planning, socio-economics, and natural systems. The resulting synthesis uses three motifs: (1) urban regions; (2) natural systems; and (3) human uses of nature, to open windows and to pinpoint ecological and planning insights ready for use.

A framework As a student and insatiable traveler, my idealism colored problems and offered ready solutions. But also as a budding scientist I learned to look more deeply, analyze the internal elements of a problem, and try to expunge opinions from my science. Generally, problems were narrow, at my scale of vision. Those were exciting times. Big pictures were all around, but as solvable problems I missed them. Big wars were leaving scarred lands and people. Waterways were heavily polluted. Trafﬁc and accidents grew. Road building accelerated through the terrain. Distinctive spread-out suburbs were just appearing. Many national populations

1

2

Regions and land mosaics were growing at 3 % per year, doubling in a bare 23 years. Now, a generation or two later, most land problems seem much bigger and also widely recognized (McNeill 2000). Yet hardly anyone seems to have a real solution. In spots, problems have been solved. Many waterways are cleaner but others dirtier. Some war-torn areas have partly healed, while new ones have appeared. Some population growth rates have dropped, yet the total population and its proportion of pre-reproductive people remain high. Road building has decreased here and increased there. New big problems have emerged. Megacities have mushroomed. Rapidly growing poor areas mark most cities around the globe. Sprawl has blanketed some valuable land areas. Freshwater has become scarce and expensive over large areas. Topsoil for food production has thinned with wind and water erosion. So what can be done? The so-called ‘‘paradox of management” is useful. Focus on a solution that is big enough to have some chance of continued success, and small enough that your efforts are visible (Forman 1995, Seddon 1997). For instance, it is hard to have an effect on the globe which is likely to muddle along in similar form, no matter what you do. But also, whereas it is easy to affect your garden, over decades, the plants there are likely to ﬂuctuate widely, never reaching any semi-stable sustainable state. So, to solve big problems, address the middle spatial scales such as landscapes and regions, which are most promising for combining the visible effects of your effort and a reasonable chance of success. Or, to solve big problems, break them into parts, and address enough to tip the balance toward solution (Gladwell 2000). Or establish a promising trend, and wait (Ozawa 2004). Or do not wait; keep adaptively adjusting the trajectory. In all the cases, of course, a key ﬁrst step is to recognize big problems as tractable, rather than hopeless or too complex. Urban regions have half the world’s population, three billion people. Consider some big problems at the urban-region scale such as megacities, rapidly growing poor areas, and outward urbanization (State of the World’s Cities 2006). Then add overwhelmed sewage wastewater systems, threatened water supplies, public health, trafﬁc jams, and growing urban air pollution. Worldwide all of these patterns are worsening. Yet a city’s urban region is a useful scale for addressing such problems and offering solutions that last. What does the future promise? No one knows, but, according to the United Nations Population Division, population trends point to nearly 200 000 people added daily to the urban population (70 million people per year). In the onrushing year 2030 (hopefully both author and reader will be here then), some ﬁve billion people, about 60 % of the world’s population, are expected to live in urban areas. So, today’s urban problems are big. How about tomorrow?

A framework

Figure 1.1 ‘‘Natural” disaster. In this area earthquakes are natural and frequent, while the ‘‘disaster” resulted from a bridge in this location which was unable to withstand the earthquake. Gavin Canyon, Los Angeles County, California; earthquake 6.8 on Richter scale. The absence of housing on these slopes near Los Angeles prevented worse effects. Photo courtesy of US Federal Highway Administration.

City populations grow over time as a consequence of births and immigration exceeding deaths and emigration. Economic ﬂuctuations may especially affect immigration and emigration rates, producing short-term population rises and drops. Urban population drops, usually short term, may also result from human conﬂict (Leningrad, 1930s; Hiroshima, 1940s; Bujumbura, Burundi, 1970s--80s) or so-called ‘‘natural” disasters (Kobe, Japan earthquake, 1990s; Aceh, Indonesia tsunami, 2000s; New Orleans, USA hurricane, 2000s) (Figure 1.1). Still, cities usually grow in population, today commonly at a 3--5 % annual growth rate, with some sections or municipalities growing at 5--10 % annually. With cities as the major central portion of urban regions, many of these trends also apply widely to urban regions.

3

4

Regions and land mosaics Consider the land surface of the urban region. Land is home and heritage, and therefore a source of sustenance and inspiration to be cared for. Land is also capital and investment to be bought, used, and sold. Furthermore, nature depends on land, and we depend on nature. Yet curiously, ‘‘We’re wasting land!” ( Josep Acebillo, Chief Architect for the Mayor of Barcelona, 2000), particularly in the urban region. So, focusing the lens on patterns and processes within an urban region reveals a dynamic mosaic of people and nature (Forman 2004a). Nature varies from some relatively large natural pieces to many highly degraded pieces. Society is arranged in a single huge central aggregation plus numerous dispersed places. The region works as a system, with ﬂows and movements across the mosaic. Also, the great mosaic changes over time, especially as human pieces expand and natural pieces shrink. This leaves nature further degraded, and the fundamental human dependence on nature’s resources riskier, less sustainable. Plato even described what his ancestors did to Greece, leaving him only a late stage of this process, a skeleton of the once-rich land and water. Nature’s ﬂows and movements across the land are particularly important in the urban region, partly because they are so buffeted by human activities. Surfacewater ﬂowing in streams and rivers supports many human needs, from clean drinking water to recreation, wastewater treatment, and aesthetics. Groundwater ﬂows create ‘‘underground reservoirs” that support wells, agriculture, and diverse natural plant communities. Wildlife disperses and migrates across the land, a key value for recreation and even human culture. In effect, important natural ﬂows inexorably permeate the region. Meanwhile urbanization spreads across the same region. Trafﬁc jams increase. Energy efﬁciency drops, leaving less-sustainable built areas. Clean unpolluted water becomes scarce and expensive. Highways form barriers that subdivide the remnants of nature. Appealing recreational and tourism sites degrade. Hard surfaces spread and ﬂood pulses get worse. Productive agriculture and family farms shrink. Forestry withers. Biodiversity is threatened and erodes. All so familiar. People of the region, long dependent on the local resources and beneﬁts of natural systems, must increasingly depend on more distant, more expensive resources. Concurrently the value of natural systems drops, as nature-dependent aesthetics, inspiration, ethics, and resources for future generations erode. This disconnect between nature’s fundamental patterns and processes and current development trends could lead to crises, forcing prompt costly actions. Irrespective, it calls for new thinking or vision, with the core objective to mesh nature and people so they both thrive (Forman 2004a). Usually it costs money to do something. Yet also it is costly, and penalizes both citizens and nature, to do nothing. Solutions to quickly address crises

A framework are normally expensive. To gradually address a legacy of cumulative impacts or accomplish a major new initiative, solutions are costly, but spread out over time. Finally some solutions cost little to provide signiﬁcant beneﬁts. Planning that heads off crises or creates positive legacies for a region is good economics. Economic gains also can be expected from many solutions involving natural systems. Consider: (a) maintaining diverse productive agricultural landscapes on the best soils; (b) concentrating rather than dispersing growth to reduce infrastructure and servicing costs; (c) investing in key areas for nature protection and nature-based tourism; (d) rethinking ﬂoodplain design to reduce ﬂood-damage costs; and (e) targeting a handful of pollution sources, plus creating stormwater wetlands, to increase a scarce supply of costly clean water. Such investments in natural systems pay dividends. Social patterns and municipalities are equally central to planning and natural systems. Towns whose edges have light and medium industry tend to have both nearby jobs and fewer trafﬁc problems and costs. Towns whose edges have parks with nature and recreation may have nearby stable appealing neighborhoods. Housing that is relatively concentrated rather than dispersed, has a much lower impact on natural systems. Strategically focusing population growth and urbanization in areas of low ecological value enhances the regional naturalsystems’ value. Creating a convenient efﬁcient large-industry center or a trucktransportation center in such a location does too. These many beneﬁts to both society and natural systems are explored in the pages ahead. Such beneﬁts emphasize that, rather than overwhelmingly concentrating on the traditional socioeconomic aspects of public transit, highways, housing, employment, urbanization, and economic development, which often can be provided in many places across the region, we should begin with best uses for the fundamental distinctive and somewhat ﬁxed land resources for the future of a region. The many speciﬁc socio-economic aspects, of course, are also critical and likely to be addressed in most regularly updated planning. Plans for speciﬁc issues as well as speciﬁc areas can be readily meshed spatially with the land-use frameworks presented in the chapters ahead. Also by focusing on land use, rather than regulatory and legal approaches that can change ‘‘overnight,” the approach helps provide a solid long-term future for a region. Political leaders with foresight, along with planners, engineers, economists, ecologists, and others who can think big, collaborate, and effectively mesh regional land uses, can accomplish a vision. They hold and will mold the future of a region in their hands. Urban planning often highlights the quality of people’s life and promotes intelligent growth (Fainstein and Campbell 1996, Hall 2002), whereas conservation planning highlights the natural systems and nature on which people

5

6

Regions and land mosaics Urban-region ring (green space masaic with scattered buildings, villages, towns and satellite cities)

Major city Metropolitan area (continuous built land) Urban region

Green space composed of landscapes, large patches, small patches, major corridors, narrow corridors (cropland, forest, desert, grassland)

Inner satellite city

Suburbs

Outer satellite city Sprawl (if present)

Wedge (greenspace)

Nearby major city

Lobe (built land)

Metropolitan area

Bulge

Urban-region ring Figure 1.2 Concepts and terms for urban regions.

live and depend (Noss and Cooperider 1994, Dale and Haeubner 2001, Marsh 2005). No models were found that provide for sustained viable natural resources and nature around cities. Clearly a new strategic approach is needed to mesh both halves, people and Nature, and create a whole.

Terms and concepts to reveal urban regions Concepts are usefully grouped into three clusters: (1) urban region and its built areas; (2) greenspaces and natural systems; and (3) urbanization. Urban region and its built areas

A city is a relatively large or important municipality. Cities analyzed in this work range from just over 250 000 to over 10 million population, though the basic city concept includes smaller important population centers, even down to 10 000 in the Amazon Basin (Browder and Godfrey 1997). The urban region is the area of active interactions between a city and its surroundings (Figure 1.2). Thus the outer boundary of an urban region is determined by a drop in rate of ﬂows and movements as one proceeds outward from the city. From the eye of a satellite, the boundary delineating a city is normally invisible. Instead the metropolitan area, or metro area, the nearly continuously built, or all-built, area of the city and adjoining suburbs, is prominent as a visible object. Here, the metro area is not deﬁned as a ‘‘commuter-shed,” as in the USA (Ofﬁce of Management and Budget 2000), since extensive commuting beyond the

Terms and concepts to reveal urban regions built metro area is limited in most cities worldwide. A built area is land with continuous closely spaced buildings, as on small properties or (p)lots. Suburbs are mainly residential municipalities, such as towns, close to a city. A suburb may be entirely within, partially within, or altogether outside a metropolitan area. Suburbia (or the suburbs or the suburban landscape) refers to adjoining, or all, suburbs around a city. The area on both sides of a metro-area border, where built and unbuilt areas intermix, is the peri-urban area (though some scholars use the term, peri-urban, in the more general sense of around the city). The urban-region ring refers to the area outside the metropolitan area and inside the urban-region boundary (Figure 1.2). This variable-width ring is a mosaic of greenspace (or unbuilt) types of land interwoven with built systems and relatively small built areas. Towns and villages are distributed over the urban-region ring. Also satellite cities (here, <250 000 population) are normally present, inner satellites and outer satellites in the inner and outer portions, respectively, of the urban-region ring. Major highways, railroads, and powerline corridors are the prominent built systems criss-crossing the urban-region ring. Urban regions have a city-center nucleus and are generally rounded. The allbuilt metropolitan area surrounded by an urban-region (or urb-region) ring is reminiscent of a gargantuan donut, and indeed a donut model is later used for analysis. The term megacity, used occasionally, refers to a city with a population of >10 million. The concepts of city size and urban region size are discussed more fully in Chapter 5. The term megalopolis refers to a group of adjoining urban regions of major cities (each with >250 000 population), such as Boston to Washington or Amsterdam--Utrecht--The Hague--Rotterdam (Carbonell and Yaro 2005). Greenspaces and natural systems

Greenspaces are unbuilt areas in an urban region, i.e., areas without continuous closely spaced buildings. Greenspaces (sometimes called open spaces) often have no buildings, but may contain a small number of relatively scattered structures. Numerous important greenspace types are present, including playing ﬁelds for sports, wetlands that reduce ﬂoods, nature reserves that protect biodiversity, tree corridors providing cool shade in summer, and market-gardening areas that produce fresh vegetables and fruits close to a city. Greenspaces range from tiny city parks to extensive woodland landscapes, and from rounded spots to linear greenways and river corridors. Greenspaces, evident on aerial photos and satellite images, may or may not be protected or have public access. Thus the many types of greenspaces parallel the many types of built areas, such as industrial, commercial, high-rise-apartment, and single-family-home. Most types of both greenspaces and built areas are useful to society.

7

8

Regions and land mosaics Nature, natural systems, and natural areas are terms widely used in this book, yet, as noted in numerous treatises, defy easy deﬁnition (Peterken 1996, Kowarik and Langer 2005). Here nature refers to what humans have not made or strongly altered (Williams 1983, Buell 2005). Normally a frog -- or a mud bank, a gust of wind, a woods, an aquifer, or even the Universe -- is an example of nature, and therefore is natural. A caveat is important for a world long populated by people, namely that some things like a hedgerow or desertiﬁed area, if human-created long ago, may be considered naturalized, or simply nature. Natural system refers to nature, but focuses on its structure, functioning, and change. Nature has a form or anatomy. Nature works, as energy, material, and species ﬂow and move. And nature changes both its form and functioning over time. The ecosystem concept is used where organisms play major roles in the structure, function, and change of the system. In urban regions, the somewhat broader natural system concept is helpful in order to include important aquifer systems, subsoil groundwater ﬂows, earthen- and rubble-ﬁll systems, and wind transport systems, as well as ecosystems. Natural resources, both in-place (e,g., for recreation and aesthetics) and extractable (e.g., mineral and wood removal), are characteristics of nature with value to people. The concepts of natural area, natural habitat, natural vegetation, natural community (or assemblage), and natural land, on the other hand, denote a type of space, an area unplanted and without intensive human management or use. Thus a woodlawn area, as a mowed grassy space often with scattered trees and shrubs, such as a typical golf course, cemetery, or city park, is not a natural area. But as something in between, a semi-natural area is commonly dominated by natural vegetation patterns with intensive-human-use unbuilt spaces intermixed. Seminatural areas are especially characteristic of metropolitan areas, though widely present in the surrounding urban-region ring. To enhance readability in the text, semi-natural areas are commonly lumped under the term natural area or natural land. The idea of ‘‘native vegetation,” not used here, contrasts with vegetation dominated by non-native species, whereas natural vegetation contrasts with that degraded by human activities. Degradation is the human-activity process of decreasing natural vertical structure, horizontal pattern, and/or ﬂows in a natural area. Habitat perforation, dissection, fragmentation, and isolation, as well as familiar processes such as polluting and overgrazing, cause habitat degradation (Odum 1982, Forman 1995, 2006, Lindenmayer and Fischer 2006). A nature reserve is an area established mainly to protect nature or biodiversity. Protected areas are spaces that have legal constraints or are guarded to maintain valuable resources, such as nature, historic structures, scenic roads, forestry tracts, game, diverse recreational opportunities, ﬂagship features of the land,

Terms and concepts to reveal urban regions and much more, for the long term. Normally each protected area accomplishes multiple functions and objectives for society. Habitat refers to a relatively distinct area and its physical and biological conditions where an organism, population, or group of species mainly lives. For example, a panda or metasequoia habitat refers to an area with suitable conditions for those populations or species, and an aquatic or grassland habitat applies to the area with suitable conditions for the community of species present. A multi-habitat species regularly uses two or more habitats. When used alone, the term habitat means natural habitat. Biodiversity or nature’s richness refers to biological abundance. The focus is primarily on native species and secondarily on natural communities, in both cases highlighting their number and the presence of rare ones. Thus a biodiversity area, whether protected or not, harbors a large number of native species or natural communities, or supports one or more rare species or community. Conservation, as long-term protection of natural resources, apparently ﬁrst focused on water, especially water quantity and to a lesser extent on water quality and ﬁsh (Pinchot 1967, Nash 1982, Schrepfer 1983, Robin 1998). Park conservation for stunning natural features and scenic value quickly followed. Also forest conservation focusing on trees, soil, and ﬂooding came to the fore. Soil conservation, emphasizing erosion, sedimentation, and vegetation cover, was next. Finally biological or biodiversity conservation highlighting species and natural communities reached center stage. The long-term protection of the combined interacting components of a natural system, whether of direct value to society or not, is nature conservation. The concept of nature conservation (Saunders and Hobbs 1991, Peterken 1996), long familiar and understood by scientists and the public, is therefore used in this book. Given the rates of urbanization and other land-use changes and the limited resources available for conservation, a site-by-site or species-by-species approach to nature conservation is of limited or local value. Instead, the focus here is on landscape pattern and (multi-species) communities. Not every water body, scenic feature, erosion-free site, or species will be conserved with this approach. However, the bulk of Nature and its most important known components should be sustained for the future. Urbanization

Urbanization is the combination of densiﬁcation and outward spread of people and built areas. In densification, the density of people and building units increases, for example, by inﬁlling greenspaces or by changing from low- to high-rise apartment buildings. In addition or alternatively, the city grows by expanding outward. The outward urban expansion or spread may occur in many

9

10

Regions and land mosaics spatial ways, such as expanding concentric zones or extending out transportation corridors or dispersing small developments outward. Cities may urbanize by rolling over suburbs, and suburbs urbanize by rolling over farmland or natural land. The outward spread of a town or village is sometimes included in the urbanization concept. Outward urbanization may or may not involve sprawl. Webster’s dictionary, consistent with the roots of the word, deﬁnes the verb, sprawl, as to spread out or stretch out awkwardly. For urban expansion, awkward is perhaps best translated as unsatisfactory or unsuitable or uncoordinated. This concept is relative to numerous characteristics of importance to society, from transportation, public health, and sense of community to loss of valuable farmland and disruption of nature (Bullard et al. 2000, Benﬁeld et al. 2001, Lopez 2003, Frumkin et al. 2004, Burchell et al. 2005). Therefore sprawl is the process of distributing built structures in an unsatisfactory spread-out (rather than compact) manner or pattern. The concept can refer to constructing single-family rather than multiple-unit buildings, houses on large rather than small lots, and many rather than few separate developments. (Note that some authors use the term sprawl as essentially a low-density concept without the dictionary dimension of awkward or unsatisfactory [Antrop 2000]). The term sprawl also refers to an area with relatively new residential structures in an unsatisfactory spread-out or low-density pattern. In this sense, the process of sprawl produces sprawl as a recognizable form on the land. An alternative pattern, especially in much of Europe, is effectively nucleus expansion or growth, where a village or town expands outward with adjacent compact urbanization. This approach capitalizes on an existing central cultural and commercial center and on the people’s sense of place. Later, however, near a major city such expanding nuclei may threaten to coalesce, or indeed coalesce, and produce a huge disjointed urbanized landscape, yet which is not a city (Forman 2004a). Some related terms are usually avoided: (a) ‘‘open space,” because sometimes it implies a low-value space waiting to be ﬁlled or built upon (most types of greenspaces are highly valuable), and sometimes it implies non-forest, which is inappropriate in mainly forested portions of a region; (b) ‘‘urban edge,” ‘‘urban fringe,” and ‘‘urban-rural fringe,” because typically these seem to be lines or narrow zones, nearly equivalent to the metropolitan-area border and considerably narrower than the peri-urban zone described above; (c) ‘‘exurban zone,” which is similar to the urban-region ring, but with an uncertain inner boundary, an unspeciﬁed outer boundary, and the suggestion of an outside void rather than valuable area; and (d) ‘‘rural area,” since the outer boundary is unspeciﬁed, and also because the term refers to the country, usually farmland, whereas in urban

Regions regions (where the term seems awkward) predominant land covers vary from cropland to forest or desert.

Regions We will explore this key topic from three perspectives: (1) regions and urban regions; (2) bioregions and ecoregions; and (3) internal structure and external effects. Regions and urban regions

Hercules was right when he placed two huge rocks at the mouth of the Mediterranean. Ever since, all ships have had to pass cautiously between these Pillars of Hercules to enter the Mediterranean Region. Once inside, the land and the diverse people are strongly linked. The sea itself serves as a giant tub for the surrounding nations’ economies and cultures. The climate of dry summers and moist winters, distinctively called the Mediterranean climate, bathes everyone. Similar vegetation, formally named Mediterranean-type vegetation, covers the region (Grove and Rackham 2001). The region contrasts mightily with the Sahara area to the south, temperate Europe to the north, and a cool, dry region to the east. The Mediterranean Region is distinctive in both physical and human terms. Two broad characteristics are commonly central to the concept of a region; macroclimate and cultural-social pattern (Forman 1995). In global air circulation, atmospheric ‘‘cells” form due to solar energy and the conﬁguration of continents, oceans, and mountain ranges. Each cell has a common macroclimate, i.e., the history of weather pattern that covers a relatively large area and differs from that in surrounding areas. Hence a geographic region typically corresponds spatially with, or is a subset of, the atmospheric cell. The Mediterranean Region, Southwestern USA, Eastern Queensland, and Scandinavia are regions with distinctive macroclimates corresponding to atmospheric cells. Southern England, Southwestern Ontario, and Northeastern China are recognized regions, but subsets of larger macroclimate areas. Culturally determined human activities on the land, as in the idea of regionalism, determine the subset-macroclimate regions. Often a single large city is the major hub, though a number of linked cities may characterize a region. A transportation network connected to the city typically ties the region together socially and economically. Mountain ranges and coastlines often form boundaries of the region. A closer look usually reveals clear evidence of a common culture or cultures across the region, as in architecture, town/village form, language, and arts. So, a region has both a common macroclimate and a common sphere of human activity and interest.

11

12

Regions and land mosaics The urban region is a distinctive and increasingly important type of region. In this case a single major city is of central importance and surrounding land is closely linked with the city. The predominant role of the city is the main difference between an urban region and a geographic region. An added cultural dimension is also present in an urban region. Typically an ‘‘urban culture” exists in the city, promulgated by a particular population formed by and committed to city life. People of an urban culture can move rather seamlessly from city to city, where they may thrive and contribute. However, normally they have little commitment to the urban region surrounding a city. A sense of place, either for a particular city or its urban region, may be limited. Certain cities are well known for a long history of regional studies and planning. Certainly London, Chicago, and Berlin are among the leaders in this group. London’s greenbelt, nearby Letchworth’s earlier greenbelt, London’s intense dependence on resources of the surrounding countryside, and many more characteristics have been grist for leading urban scholars and planners (Munton 1983, Turner 1992, Parsons and Schuyler 2000, Hall 2002). Berlin, encompassed in the Brandenburg Region, has undergone dramatic physical changes, and with the meticulous German planning tradition has also merited much scholarly attention (Sukopp et al. 1995, Breuste et al. 1998, Kuhbler 2000, von Krosigk 2001, Bahlburg 2003). Chicago is of special note for several reasons: (a) a City Beautiful Movement launched in Chicago in the 1890s which inﬂuenced American city centers and architecture; (b) an inﬂuential broad-scale 1909 Plan of Chicago; (c) a group of social scientists, including Robert Park, who drew in part from ecological principles to understand urban dynamics; (d) a subsequent sequence of plans with greenways including Cook and DePage counties; and (e) a recent push for a ‘‘green” Chicago with numerous parks, green roofs, and natural areas (Schmid 1975, Cronon 1991, Nowak 1994, Cityspace 1998, Greenberg 2002, Daley 2002, Platt 2004). Of course many other cities including Tokyo, New York, Paris, Melbourne, Beijing, Moscow, and Mexico City have had major regional emphases, in some cases including important environmental dimensions (Sit 1995, Pezzoli 1998, Ishikawa 2001, Hall 2002). The literature of urban history, urban studies, and urban planning focuses on the city, yet is continuously marked by a series of leaders who highlight the importance of the urban region. Illustrative are the works of Geddes (1915), Cronon (1991), Fainstein and Campbell (1996), Warren (1998), Ravetz (2000), Soja (2000), Bullard et al. (2000), Hall (2002), and Dreier et al. (2004). Much less common are cases that emphasize natural systems, in addition to the traditional economics, transportation, and housing, as key factors in urban regions

Regions (Warren 1998, Atkinson et al. 1999, Ravetz 2000, Steinitz and McDowell 2001, White 2002, Register 2006, Moore 2007). Many challenges remain, though, to create a body of literature and work useful to society that combines the urban-region scale with major environmental dimensions and their human uses. Ecologists are challenged by the idea that ecological conditions within an urban region really matter, much less that they are of major importance (Sukopp et al. 1995, McDonnell et al. 1997, Pickett 2006, Grimm et al. 2003, Musacchio and Wu 2004, Kowarik and Korner 2005). Architects may highlight the importance of greenspaces for amenity and aesthetic beneﬁts, but are challenged to deal with the many powerful environmental forces at broad scales (Norberg-Schulz 1980, Calthorpe 1993, Duany et al. 2000, Register 2006). Engineers are challenged to recognize the signiﬁcant construction, maintenance, and repair beneﬁts of designing and building with, rather than against, nature (van Bohemen 2004). And on and on. As cities explode with people and roll outward over valuable land, a powerful regional and ecological perspective is needed. Indeed environmental and recreational resources often require the broadest spatial perspective for the urban planner (Robert Yaro, personal communication). Bioregions and ecoregions

The idea of linking the bio-physical and cultural dimensions in regionalism is well-illustrated and strengthened in literature and art (Buell 2005). Wordsworth was especially a poet of England’s Lake District and Henry David Thoreau an interpreter of New England (USA). The American Southwest came alive in the art of Georgia O’Keefe and the landscape-detective eyes of J. B. Jackson. Grant Wood’s regionalism art portrays a US region of cornﬁelds, tree groves, farms, and hedgerows (Corn 1983). Tom Roberts’ and Arthur Streeter’s late nineteenth-century paintings, unencumbered by English landscape forms, revealed real Australian landscapes (Radford 1996). In this way bioregionalism integrates the geographical terrain and the terrain of consciousness (Berg and Dasmann 1977). A major drainage basin is the big picture and one portion of it is, e.g., colored green or yellow by the inhabitants who sink in roots there over time. As a place-based sensitivity (Buell 2005), the meshing of ecology and culture at this spatial scale provides a bioregion dimension, usefully grounded between local culture and thinking globally. The bioregion concept applies well to the city and its region (Snyder 1990). A culturally and economically diverse populace congregates in a spot. Is its sense of place the city, or the city with its surroundings? In a place-based bioregion,

13

14

Regions and land mosaics people care about and care for the region. The combined threads of culture and ecology run deeply in both space and time. The ecoregion concept, in contrast, speciﬁcally highlights biological distributions over a large area. The ecoregion is a large unit of land and water typically characterized and delineated by climate, geology, topography, and associations of plants and animals. Hence it divides the land surface up biophysically rather than by political boundaries. This is the basic framework currently used by The Nature Conservancy to protect biodiversity (Groves et al. 2002, Anderson 2003, Magnusson 2004). It also has been used for planning by the US Environmental Protection Agency (Omernik 1987), USDA Forest Service (Bailey 1995, 1998), and World Wildlife Fund (Olson et al. 2001). In general, ecoregions are unfamiliar and difﬁcult for policymakers and the public. Normally urban regions are much smaller than an ecoregion, though the location of an urban region may have considerable impact on processes across an ecoregion. Internal structure and external effects

All the regions discussed share the same basic type of internal structure. Many landscapes, e.g., from suburban to forested and industrial to cropland, are present, and their spatial arrangement is a key to understanding and planning a region (Forman 1995). The Greater Yellowstone Region in the Rocky Mountains is a good example (Keiter and Boyce 1991, Hansen and Rotella 2001, Hansen 2002). Cattle ranchlands, river ﬂoodplains, pine forests, spruce-ﬁr forests, alpine tundra zones, and built areas are well intermixed. In addition, many processes tie these landscapes together: fast-moving wildﬁres, streams of tourists, moving livestock, horseback riders, streamﬂows and ﬂoodwaters, tree harvesting and logging trucks, grizzlies, elk migration, bison herds, hikers, local economic activities, rafters and ﬁshermen, vehicles on road networks, and more. The linked landscapes work as a region, and are occasionally planned as a region. A region is larger and inherently more stable than a landscape within it (Forman 1995). Therefore planning a region as a sustainable environment or place provides a higher probability of achieving success. The suburban landscape sandwiched between city and, for instance, cropland/woodland surroundings plays a huge role in how the urban region works. Suburbia is source, sink, and ﬁlter. As a source, which gives off objects, suburbia provides commuters, manufactured goods, and suburban species to the city. Suburbs also provide recreationists, commercial products, and suburban species to the outer cropland/woodland areas. As a sink, which soaks up objects, the suburban landscape absorbs air pollutants, water pollution, and non-native species from the city. Also suburbia absorbs food products, dispersing woodland and cropland species, and farmland dust and chemicals from the outer zone.

Regions These ﬂows emphasize that the city is also both a source and a sink. The city’s economic activity may depend on the ﬂows of commuters, and its seminatural parks and greenspaces depend on continued native species dispersing in from outside. Put another way, a city is swamped by commuters, bathed by outside air pollutants, protected from ﬂooding by suburban wetlands, nourished by market-gardening food products, and enriched by outside recreational opportunities. And of course the outer cropland/woodland zone is also a source and sink. These numerous ﬂows and movements among city, suburbs, and surroundings represent a regional system with many feedbacks. An urban region is eternally working. An outward expanding city pushes these ﬂows outward. However, the areas and the spatial arrangement of city, suburbia, and cropland/woodland also change. A larger city means bigger inward and outward ﬂows. If the suburban landscape noticeably widens, its inward and outward ﬂows also increase, but the linkage between city and outer cropland/woodland ring becomes more tenuous. People in the city are further divorced from natural and agricultural landscapes. When an outer cropland/woodland area shrinks signiﬁcantly, the ﬂows do too. In effect, outward urbanization and its spatial arrangement become critical in determining how the urban region of the future will work. The change in width of suburbia and the spatial pattern of urbanization point to another important little-analyzed role of the suburban landscape. It serves as a filter, selectively reducing ﬂows between city and cropland/woodland outside. Wind may blow agricultural dust inward and city air pollutants outward, sometimes unaffected by suburbia. But streams and rivers that ﬂow from outer areas into the city pass through suburbia. Suburbs may have a high or low impermeable-surface cover (Arnold and Gibbons 1996, Forman et al. 2003). With considerable hard surface, much rainwater is added to the streams, increasing ﬂood hazard in the city ( Jared 2004). Alternatively, ample wetlands and other natural vegetation in suburbs absorb rainwater, helping to protect the city from ﬂooding. Moving in the opposite direction, city residents crowd highways on weekends to recreate in outer woodland areas. Narrow commercial suburban highways squeeze the trafﬁc ﬂows. However, providing a richness of small recreational locations across suburbia that attract and are used by city residents would reduce the congested inward and outward weekend ﬂows. As for any ﬁlter, the degree of ﬁltering depends on the amount of input and the prevention of clogging. The suburban landscape varies in width and the greatest ﬁltering may occur in the widest portions. In short, adjustments in the suburbs and in channeling urbanization spread can make an urban region work much better.

15

16

Regions and land mosaics Like any large area, an urban region is tightly linked to surrounding regions and to distant regions. These linkages often strongly affect spatial patterns and processes within the region of interest (Forman 2004a, Forman et al. 2004). One set of patterns might be called boundary issues because their origin is near the urban-region boundary, either just inside or just outside. Boundary issues often warrant careful watching, because they can rapidly affect the urban region, or the adjoining region, and often change over time. Inputs from an adjacent region that affect a major portion of an urban region are typically of greatest concern. Examples include a major water supply from an adjacent region’s aquifer, people entering for recreation or the city’s cultural resources, and industrial air pollutants blown in. Outputs from a region to its adjoining regions may be equally signiﬁcant though lower proﬁle. People and goods enter and leave by car, truck, rail, sea, and air, so each of those routes warrants evaluation. For example, holiday trafﬁc is often channeled between the metropolitan area and coastal or mountain areas. Distant changes also affect regional inputs and outputs. A high-speed rail line, new ski recreation areas, changes in immigration policy, and government policy changes elsewhere may signiﬁcantly affect a region. Across a continent effects may involve migratory birds, livestock disease spread, changing crops, Nature-based tourism, new markets, and international policy changes. In short, land use in a region is tightly linked in both directions to other regions.

Land-mosaic perspective and landscape ecology Urban planning, city planning, regional planning, natural resource planning, and conservation planning are all reasonably well known ﬁelds with textbooks, journals, academic programs, professional societies, and leading scholars and practitioners. All contribute extremely important knowledge and insight to planning the future of a region. The land-mosaic perspective that has emerged from landscape ecology and related ﬁelds in the past two decades builds from these and other foundations. It provides a body of theory and principles focusing on the spatial arrangement of land uses for meshing and sustaining both natural systems and people (Forman 1995, 2004a). In essence, landscape ecology focuses on analyzing and understanding land mosaics, large heterogeneous areas with important natural systems viewed at the human scale, such as landscapes, regions, or the area seen from an airplane window or in an aerial photograph (Hobbs 1995, Dramstad et al. 1996, Burel and Baudry 1999, Farina 2005, Decamps and Decamps 2001, Turner et al. 2001, Wu and Hobbs 2007, Ingegnoli 2002, Anderson 2003, Decamps and Decamps 2004, Wiens and Moss 2005, Turner 2005). Spatial arrangement is a core analytic

Land-mosaic perspective

Figure 1.3 Landscape structure, function, and change altered by outward urbanization from a metropolitan area. Relative to regional urbanization patterns, the central patch of multi-unit housing is compact development, the older group of house lots on right was sprawl when built, and, at a broader scale, the residential developments in the landscape represent a sprawl, rather than compact or contiguous, arrangement. Northwest of Baltimore, Maryland (USA). Photo courtesy of US Department of Agriculture.

approach. Landscape ecology is at exactly the right spatial scale for effective planning. It explicitly integrates nature and people. Its principles work in any landscape, from urban to forest and cropland to desert. Its spatial language is simple, facilitating easy communication among land-use decision-makers, professionals, and scholars of many disciplines. Centered on spatial pattern at the human scale, landscape ecology is directly usable. Like a cell or human body, the landscape exhibits three broad characteristics, structure, function, and change (Forman 1995). Landscape structure or pattern is simply the spatial arrangement of the elements present, the natural areas and human land uses (Figure 1.3). Landscape functioning is the movement or ﬂows of water, materials, species, and people through the pattern (Harris et al. 1996, Forman 1999, 2002b). And change is the dynamics or transformation of pattern over time, somewhat analogous to sequential images seen by turning a kaleidoscope. Conveniently, the land mosaic or structural pattern may be modeled or understood using only three types of elements: patches, corridors, and a background

17

18

Regions and land mosaics matrix (Forman 1979a, Forman and Godron 1981). These universal elements are the handle for comparing highly dissimilar landscapes and developing basic principles. This patch--corridor--matrix model is also the handle for land-use planning, since spatial pattern strongly controls movements, ﬂows, and changes of both natural systems and people. The simple spatial language is further highlighted when considering how patches, corridors, and the matrix combine to form the variety of land mosaics on Earth, either existing or planned (Forman and Godron 1981, Forman 1995, Lindenmayer and Franklin 2002, Ingegnoli 2002, Hilty et al. 2006). What are the key attributes of patches? They are large or small, smooth or convoluted, round or elongated, few or numerous, dispersed or clustered, and so on (Figure 1.3). What are the properties of corridors? Narrow or wide, straight or curvy, continuous or disconnected, etc. The matrix is single or subdivided, variegated or relatively homogeneous, perforated or dissected, and so forth. These spatial descriptors are close to dictionary deﬁnitions and familiar to all. Adding a housing development, a nature reserve, or a highway, for example, changes the mosaic pattern. Consequently the diverse ﬂows and movements -- of water, materials, species, and people -- are altered in generally predictable ways. Basic form-and-function principles help (e.g., why rabbit ears are short in the arctic and long in the tropics). Round patches protect internal resources, whereas convoluted patches enhance ﬂows across the boundary. Negative environmental impacts often emerge from unplanned human alterations, or from changes designed overwhelmingly for people. On the other hand, beneﬁcial results, especially for the long term, often follow planned changes that highlight both natural systems and people. In short, landscape ecology brings to the table simplicity and clarity, a focus on spatial arrangement, a broad-scale perspective, easy communication among users, a meshing of natural systems and people, and application to any landscape. It becomes increasingly central as society begins to seriously address the question of creating sustainable environments. Enlightened, sustainable, visionary, economically and ecologically viable, or glorious land mosaics are a worthy target for planning and society. As a vision or product of planning, a land mosaic is effectively a spatial arrangement so nature and people both thrive long term. In urban regions built spaces are meshed with green spaces.

Spatial scales and their attributes Ecological studies and planning projects overwhelmingly focus on spaces smaller than a region. Although these ﬁne-scale areas and sites are not the focus of this book, they are important here from three perspectives. First,

Spatial scales and their attributes many types of the spaces are repeated by the hundreds or thousands in an urban region. Consequently, if good models or generic solutions were determined for the small spaces, their cumulative effect could be measurable or even quite signiﬁcant at the regional scale. A second reason to focus inward on small spaces relates to hierarchy theory (Forman 1964, O’Neill et al. 1986). To understand or manage something of interest, three levels of scale are especially important (Freemark et al. 2002). The scale just above or broader than the area or object of interest exerts effects on the area. Second, other areas at the same scale as the area of interest exert competitive or collaborative effects. And ﬁnally, the scale just below or ﬁner than the area of interest affects the area. This ﬁner scale is where most people look for answers. How does the internal structure and functioning affect the larger object of interest? All three scales are important for urban regions. The third reason to look at ﬁne-scale patterns emanates from human perception and policy. Unless one goes up in a balloon or analytically looks down from airplane windows or pores over satellite images and maps, one does not really see an urban region. Rather, the public mainly sees and relates to small spaces. Thus translating public preferences into public policy and planning generally means dealing with small spaces (Nassauer 1997, Johnson and Hill 2002). The urban region is a hot spot of highly diverse small spaces packed together. So, rather than considering numerous internal urban-region patterns here, a few key ones are illustrated in a sequence of scales from broad to ﬁne. Areas or patches are ﬁrst presented, followed by linear features or corridors. Then a close-up of four types of spaces is presented, pinpointing their spatial or unusual attributes, along with some interesting types of planning options.

Patches and corridors at a sequence of scales

Areas or patches, as well as strips or corridors, are conspicuous and important at each spatial scale in a region (Freemark et al. 2002). Repeatedly using a giant zoom lens, we ﬁrst view patches and then the corridors. At the broadest scale, the urban region is composed of a metropolitan area and an urban-region ring (Figure 1.2). Focusing the lens in a bit, typically a city is composed of districts: a central business district, other commercial districts, industrial areas, various multi-unit residential areas, major city parks, and so forth (Lynch and Hack 1996, Warren 1998, LeGates and Stout 2003, Wong 2004). The suburban landscape in turn is composed of towns and municipalities, commercial/industrial land, residential land, agricultural areas, natural areas, and more. The metropolitan area is the city and the inner, continuously built, portion of suburbia. The urban-region

19

20

Regions and land mosaics ring consists of the outer, incompletely built, portion of suburbia, natural land, agricultural land, towns, villages, and satellite cities. Focusing in still further puts the preceding somewhat out of focus, but sharpens up new patterns. A town or municipality is covered with various residential densities or (p)lot sizes, commercial types, light and heavy industry, mixed-use areas, plus similar numbers of important greenspace land-covers, such as school land, municipal land, water-protection land, farmland, ballﬁelds/playgrounds, nature-based recreation land, and so on. Continuing to turn the lens, a residential neighborhood (composed of housing developments, parks, ﬁelds, and small shopping areas) appears (Figure 1.3), next a housing development (composed of house lots), and then a house lot (composed of front yard/garden, house, backyard, etc.). Analogous patterns for prominent corridors or strips appear at these different scales (Forman 1995, Warren 1998, Bennett 2003, Ahern 2002, Vos et al. 2002, Jongman and Pungetti 2004, Hilty et al. 2006). Mountain ridges and river corridors, along with major valleys, stream corridors, highways, and railroads predominate in urban regions. The unusual greenbelt may be conspicuous here. The metro-area and city scales manifest river corridors bulging with infrastructure, occasional stream corridors (most streams are in underground pipes), highways, rail lines, and greenways. Continuing to focus the lens inward reveals in sequence, a town or municipality (with water-protection and walking/wildlife movement corridors, roads/railroads, and pipelines/powerlines), housing development (with streets, sidewalks, street-tree lines, and continuous back-lot lines), and ﬁnally a house lot (with driveway, shrub/tree rows especially along side-lot and back-lot lines, and open view-lines in front and back). In short, patches and corridors in a sequence of scales usefully describe an urban region. Spatial attributes and planning options illustrated

The prevalence of patches and corridors at all scales highlights the importance of using landscape ecology in analysis and planning of the urban region. However, let us ﬁrst look more closely at some attributes, and associated planning options, for four of the patches and corridors at different scales: city parks, road networks, stream corridors, and house lots. These four spatial features are abundant in urban regions. City parks As patches or areas, city parks are scattered over a matrix of densely built area, with the density of residents varying widely from place to place. The number of nearby residents per park and the average distance of residents from a park are useful attributes for planning (Turner 1992, Cityspace 1998, Beatley

Spatial scales and their attributes 2000, Ishikawa 2001). One could add the attractiveness and safety of local routes to and from a park as important to park planning. The focus here, however, is on parks themselves. Is it better for a city park to be relatively homogeneous and different from other parks, or for it to be quite heterogeneous and similar to other parks (Forman 2004a)? In the ﬁrst case, each park can be relatively large and important for a single land use, say ballﬁelds or semi-natural vegetation. Thus the park system, as a whole, contains a collection of large specialized ﬂagship parks. In the second case, each park has a similar wide diversity of small land-use spaces packed together. Yet the system as, a whole, is monotonous and missing the large ﬂagship land-use spaces. Advantages and disadvantages of these extremes are evident. The homogeneous large-land-use park permits specialization, such as unusually high-quality ballﬁelds or a semi-natural area with somewhat rare species. It is apt to draw ‘‘specialized” residents from, and have some positive effect on, a larger radius within the city. In contrast, the heterogeneous park of small land-use areas packed together draws ‘‘all” residents from, and has a stronger positive effect on, a smaller radius. The homogeneous park is likely to be a source of some uncommon species which disperse through the surrounding neighborhoods (Houck and Cody 2000, Wein 2006). More species may disperse from the heterogeneous parks, but nearly all of the species are common (Boada and Capdevila 2000). Consider the interactions between parks, and between park and neighborhood. If all parks have similar and diverse small land-use spaces, they attract residents from small circles around them. Therefore a high density of parks is needed to serve everyone. Local residents tend to have pride in and help care for such parks. Common species can be expected to move readily among these similar parks. On the other hand, specialized dissimilar parks draw residents from broadly overlapping circles, but may not engender as much pride and care by local residents. Here the somewhat different species in each park, including some uncommon species, are less likely to move between parks because the land cover in each park is so different. For the diverse-land-use park, higher maintenance budgets may be needed to deal with the ever-prevalent conﬂicts among land uses. Confounding the situation, government and especially park-maintenance budgets often ﬂuctuate markedly over time. Consequently, land care by local residents is important to get through low-budget phases without major degradation of a park. Providing attractive and safe walkways and other transportation modes that radiate from parks should enhance park usage, pride, and care by residents. Also green strips radiating outward from a park provide routes for species to move through and enrich a neighborhood. These corridors may be greenways, tree

21

22

Regions and land mosaics rows, shrub strips, lines of balcony plants, or even a sequence of green roofs (Hien et al. 2007). Road networks The form and usage of road networks vary widely, from a regular grid with similar roads and trafﬁc levels to a highly irregular net with a strong hierarchy of roads and trafﬁc ﬂows (Forman et al. 2003, Forman 2004b). The latter case has major highways with large trafﬁc ﬂows and tiny lightly used roads. It also has high-road-density portions and low-road-density portions, and intermixed straight and winding roads. Furthermore, community planners often discuss the pros and cons of including cul-de-sac or dead-end roads in the network. All these options overlie a mosaic of land uses in the urban region, and provide to-and-from access for residents and business. Meeting traffic demand is traditionally the watchword for transportation planners. Sometimes, in response to economic investment or other interests, government builds a road to open up a little-used area for development. Perhaps more frequently, when development and trafﬁc build up, and then demand increases, government builds or widens a road. Thus road building may stimulate development, and development may stimulate road construction. In the former case, the question is whether the value to society of the little-used area, e.g., for protecting an aquifer or recreational opportunities or biodiversity, is greater or less than the value resulting from road building. In the case of development stimulating roadbuilding, the question is whether a viable alternative for moving people or goods exists rather than road construction. Providing alternate modes (types) of transportation, as well as traffic calming, the slowing and channeling of trafﬁc by creative road designs and modiﬁcations, are widely known planning approaches. To promote a sense of community in neighborhoods, designing the road networks ‘‘for 7-year-olds and 70-year-olds” is sometimes advocated. In other words, provide for attractive, safe walking, playing, bicycling, and meeting places. In addition, this can be combined with road-network design, at least at a limited scale, to provide attractive, safe accessibility for visitors. Road networks are also of major ecological importance (Forman et al. 2003, Forman 2006). The road infrastructure and the trafﬁc on it in an urban region have effects reverberating widely through the natural systems present. A busy highway may degrade the avian communities in natural vegetation for hundreds of meters on both sides, presumably due to trafﬁc noise (Reijnen et al. 1995, 1996, Forman et al. 2002). Probably most roads alter the groundwater levels and surface-ﬂowing waters locally, but because the network is so dense around metro areas, hydrology is

Spatial scales and their attributes widely disrupted. This results in ﬂooding, bridge problems, water-supply degradation, loss of ﬁsh populations, aquatic habitat loss, wetland loss, and so forth. Stormwater washes a range of pollutants, such as heavy metals and hydrocarbons, from roads and vehicles into water bodies. Thus stormwater-mitigation techniques and structures may be present, but are usually needed in much greater abundance near roads. Basically, instead of accelerating stormwater ﬂows and pollutants in ditches and pipes directly to water bodies where several negative effects result, the stormwater can often be dispersed into the ground. For example, common solutions include vegetated swales and detention basins, where water ﬂows can be slowed and reduced while chemical pollutants are ﬁltered and broken down (France 2002, Brandt et al. 2003, Hough 2004). Most likely, any road is a barrier or ﬁlter to crossing by some animals. Hence the dense road networks in urban regions are particularly disruptive, and divide the land up into little sections, often containing small populations rather than the former large populations. However, busy multilane highways are major barriers to crossing by wildlife, as well as to walkers and local residents. In addition to the trafﬁc-noise degradation or avoidance zone referred to above, the highway structure with moving trafﬁc is intimidating and dangerous. Thus wildlife underpasses and overpasses are increasingly built to overcome the highway barrier effect. These reconnect habitats on opposite sides of the road and facilitate wildlife movement across the road (Rosell Pages and Velasco Rivas 1999, Forman et al. 2003, Iuell et al. 2003, Trocme et al. 2003). Large and small crossing structures, with or without water ﬂows, are built in many creative designs to aid different types of animals. The distance between wildlife-crossing structures to reestablish landscape connectivity is a key dimension subject to active research (Clevenger and Walth 2005). Major underpasses and overpasses in places may also be designed for attractive, safe crossing by people, both local residents and longer-distance hikers. Managed roadsides cover a huge total land area, and could be used to address a wide range of societal objectives, in addition to stormwater and wildlifecrossing issues (Forman et al. 2003, Forman 2005). Aesthetics, wood products, habitats for biodiversity, carbon sequestration, enhanced trafﬁc safety, enhanced crossing by wildlife, and much more are addressable in roadsides. The overall result would be variegated roadsides, visually diverse vegetated strips alongside roads which serve many objectives of society. Stream corridors As the third example of a small structure widely repeated across the land, the stream corridor offers special challenges and opportunities in an urban region. In the natural landscapes present, stream corridors with wide continuous

23

24

Regions and land mosaics vegetation protecting the stream are interconnected into a complete dendritic network (Wetzel 2001, Kalff 2002, Binford and Karty 2006). In the more widespread agricultural landscapes, tiny intermittent channels and small ﬁrst-order streams may have their strips of covering vegetation entirely removed to create large crop ﬁelds requiring large tractors. Considerable wildlife habitat is lost. Perhaps more importantly, the loss of tiny vegetation strips results in extensive stormwater runoff producing downstream ﬂoods, plus extensive soil erosion and sedimentation problems. Both the altered hydrology and erosion mean that downstream stretches have degraded water quality, aquatic habitats, and ﬁsh populations. Solutions to these problems are tough and must address the intermittent and tiny streams. Larger streams are often channelized through farmland in urban regions, but with narrow strips of riparian vegetation discontinuously distributed along them. Widening and increasing the connectivity of these vegetated stream corridors is particularly valuable for wildlife habitat and movement. Streams in built areas suffer different fates (Paul and Meyer 2001). Some continue for stretches, but tend to be channelized or straightened with rock or concrete ‘‘rip-rap” sides. In consequence, water velocity increases, channels dry out in dry periods, and aquatic habitat and species diversity are drastically reduced. Other streams disappear for stretches, or entirely, into concrete channels, or into underground pipes, where water rushes directly to a downslope water body. The stream is gone. Sometimes the vegetated stream corridor along a concrete channel or over the pipe also disappears, in this case to development. In some cases the former stream corridor continues as a recreational greenway or a seemingly abandoned green strip between communities. ‘‘Daylighting,” the conversion of an underground piped water ﬂow into a channelized or somewhat curvy stream, is one solution occasionally achieved. Many designs and plans exist to address this range of stream-corridor-in-built-area issues, but progress is slow or negative. In both the agricultural and built landscapes the surrounding land use normally has a much greater impact on streamwater quality than does the riparian zone or vegetated stream corridor. Thus a range of ﬁne-scale solutions over the land is available and used in spots. Hedgerows, scattered trees, wooded patches, grassy swales along intermittent channels, limited herbicide use, and other practices can noticeably decrease water and pollutant runoff from farmland. They also increase habitat cover, diversity, and connectivity for biodiversity. In built areas a stream is typically lined with adjacent house or other building lots, which are designed and managed in extremely different ways. Thus dumping, dogs, cats, yard fertilizers, insecticides, other chemicals, vegetation cutting, erosion, septic seepage, trampling, and much more, varies markedly from lot to

Spatial scales and their attributes lot at an extremely ﬁne scale (Matlack 1993). Design and planning solutions here can be at the neighborhood, housing-development, and house-lot scales. House lots A house or building (p)lot exists in context. It may be an opening surrounded by wooded lots, a tiny woods or oasis surrounded by open lots, a spot along a distinct gradient say from uphill to downhill, a location in a major corridor such as for snowmelt water ﬂow or migrating elk (Cervus), or simply representative of the surrounding lots (Forman 1995). Planning and design starts with such context. Location of the lot relative to road network, shopping, schools, and so on further highlights the importance of context. Within the lot, a building is often located partly based on cultural tradition, regulatory setbacks from the street or lot-lines, space needed for a septic system, the proximity to wetlands or a ﬂood zone, and so forth. The building’s design and outer surface provides few or many microhabitats for a rich assortment of species, from lichens and mosses to lizards and birds (Kellert 2005). A driveway and various other structures may be present, and their location is extremely important, ecologically, for the house lot. As at broader scales, the patch and corridor approach to understanding and designing the lot is valuable. Often wooded corridors are used, e.g., for privacy along side-lot-lines, as foundation plantings along a wall, to separate sections of a yard, and along a back-lot-line (Owen 1991). The back-lot-line may be especially important for biodiversity since, if far enough behind the building, it is likely to be least manicured and most natural. Also the back-lot-line may be aligned with those of surrounding lots, which provides a corridor for wildlife movement through the housing area. Open corridors for unobstructed views are common in front to see up and down a street, and in back for views to the back-lot-line and even to the sides. These corridors provide ﬁne-scale routes for certain wildlife movement. Numerous small different patches, as in the city park example above, provide habitat heterogeneity for many common species. Alternatively a somewhat-large open patch might attract some open-country species that otherwise would be absent. If it is a well-used lawn, the species will be ephemeral, but if it is a seldomcut meadow, some species may become resident. Analogously, a somewhat-large wooded patch may attract and provide habitat for some uncommon woodland species (Goldstein et al. 1981, Forman 1995). Thus a clump of trees, e.g., in a backlot-line corner, may attract some species. A large shrubby patch provides both food and cover for ground animals and will normally attract a relatively different set of species. Trees with shrub cover beneath is a still-better combination, also because it provides darker shade and moister conditions in the center at ground

25

26

Regions and land mosaics level. Having a similar woody clump adjacent on the neighbor’s lot, or even four adjacent areas of woody vegetation where four lots intersect, can produce quite a signiﬁcant habitat for woodland species in a housing development. Two other design options that have big effects on biodiversity should be mentioned. First, edges or boundaries between land uses or habitats may be hard or soft (Forman 1995). Hard boundaries are relatively straight and abrupt and attract a limited number of species. Soft boundaries, which normally attract many more species, may be gradual (i.e., wider edges), curvy with lobes and coves, or simply irregular and patchy. The second broad design option is to artiﬁcially enhance or inﬂate biodiversity by adding human-created resources. The options stretch the imagination: bird feeders, brush piles, limestone walls, east--west soil berms, bat boxes, gradual ﬁshpool borders, still or splashing water, deer salt-licks, red foliage to attract autumn bird-migrants, and on and on. Concentrating such approaches can artiﬁcially raise biodiversity enormously. In short, city parks, road networks, stream corridors, and house lots are small objects that are typically numerous and widespread across an urban region. Each has a range of spatial attributes suggested above which represent useful handles for planning and design options. More importantly, wise solutions, when multiplied by the hundreds or thousands, are likely to have a major cumulative beneﬁcial effect on the urban region as a whole.

2

Planning land

How much of the land should be planned and how much designed? I would say that remote areas dominated by natural processes should only be subjected to the broadest-scale planning, and certainly should escape any ﬁne-scale design. The rest of the world needs broad-scale planning to identify, protect, and develop best land uses. In contrast, ﬁne-scale design that protects and creates inspiring places for people is extremely valuable in scattered spots, especially in urban regions where people concentrate. How would you answer the question? Land planning is now considered from three broad perspectives: (1) planning and land management; (2) conservation planning; and (3) urban planning focused on urban regions.

Planning and land management Leading off the chapter with land management highlights the relatively short-term issues of planning, where adaptively managing existing land and its resources, particularly protected land, is the goal. We begin with some perspectives on the role of planning, and then focus on land management. The role of planning

Physical planning is the prime concern here, rather than the relatively non-spatial political, economic, social, and policy planning. Both urban planning and conservation planning focus on space. Place is more important in urban planning, and habitat in conservation planning. Both place and habitat have deep ties and meaning to space. Place includes the natural and the built, but expresses the human afﬁnity for a space (Norberg-Schulz 1980, Seddon 1997). Habitat includes the natural and sometimes the built, but highlights the

27

28

Planning land dependence of natural organisms on a space’s set of environmental conditions. So, physical planning, both urban and conservation, provides spatial arrangements. Places and habitats are arranged. Furthermore the spaces arranged vary widely in the relative degree of human and natural inﬂuence. Still, physical planning is directed to a potpourri of targets. For example, planning may focus on biodiversity, hazards/disasters, economic development, public health, water supply, energy, air pollution, climate change, and on and on. A plan often includes many or all of the targets, and if so, a hierarchy of priorities and emphasis is present. Usually one, two, or three targets are primary, with the rest superﬁcially considered. Land planning occurs at national, state/province, and local county/town levels (Babbitt 2005). Narrow plans focusing on a particular sector or goal may be useful, but then meshing them effectively with diverse land uses becomes problematic. Rather, multiple-goal solutions reﬂected in a mosaic of best land uses is the subject at hand. Plans may be weak or strong, with a short-term or long-term horizon. The alternative, or control, is lack of overall planning which characterizes most areas of land. Perspectives of the public, of policymakers, and of the planner determine the focus areas of a plan. Usually extreme views, such as considering the city to be an ‘‘urban desert,” or alternatively, the surrounding land to be simply ‘‘hinterland,” are ﬁltered out early. Thus in urban regions the traditional primary targets have been economics, transportation, housing, industry, and, to facilitate implementation, public policy (Campbell and Fainstein 2003, Hall 2002, LeGates and Stout 2003, Berke et al. 2006). Commonly water, biodiversity, air pollution, and other ecological dimensions (Atkinson et al. 1999, Ravetz 2000, Tress et al. 2004, Marsh 2005, Register 2006) are not. The ﬁnal planning subject introduced here is especially signiﬁcant. Most people want to leave the world a little better. Yet worldwide, both cities and nature seem to be degrading in the face of huge, almost unstoppable forces. So, in practice, the incremental approach implies improving spots one by one within the broad trend. Or, more ambitiously, one may slightly slow the rate of degradation. An alternative approach for planners is to envision a better future. Then make the vision spatial, sketching out or outlining, without details, its general form and structure. The policymaker and the public can evaluate and appropriately modify a tangible vision, even lay out possible routes to get there. Which approach is more promising in a downward spiral, incremental steps or striving for a vision? Land management

All protected lands and resources have one planning and management objective: prevention of human overuse. After that, each type of protected land

Planning and land management has its own somewhat distinct priority goals. To prevent overuse, consider two useful spatial attributes. Typically people are concentrated outside a protected area, especially in one direction (Figure 2.1). Second, the most valuable resources are primarily in the central portion of a protected area. Therefore management concentrates on controlling people, their movements, and their effects near the boundary on that one side. Three potential spatial filters exist for protected areas (Schonewald-Cox and Bayless 1986, Forman 1995). First the zone just outside the administrative boundary may be planned and managed to reduce somewhat the number of people reaching the boundary. Approaches might include mainly off-limits land uses, roads parallel rather than perpendicular to the boundary, and the presence of ‘‘decoy” lands designed to be so appealing and interesting that many people never get beyond them. Second, the boundary itself can be a ﬁlter, such as stopping for an entrance fee, creating a linear inhospitable wetland, and maintaining few access points. Third and most useful is to make the edge portion of the protected area wonderful, so very few people head on into the valuable central resource area. For instance, edge portions may have most of the accessible roads, several good loop walking trails, ﬁshing areas, wildlife-viewing towers, and countless other attractive attributes. In effect, these magnets in the edge are resources provided to attract the public’s interest and appreciation sufﬁciently to remain near the boundary, thus conserving the center of a protected area (Forman 1995). Land management also deals with the key resources protected, and often includes lots of planning, monitoring, and research. Nevertheless, spatial arrangements and movements of people are the main key to successful land management (Dale and Haeuber 2001, Karr 2002, Liu and Taylor 2003). Normally it is much easier and less costly to lock an access-road gate, give a portable communication device to a ranger, or provide educational information at one strategic point, than it is, for example, to continually repair eroded-soil areas, artiﬁcially manipulate wildlife populations, or restore overused riparian vegetation. Let us look more closely at three types of protected lands common in urban regions, recreation sites, nature reserves, and wetlands. These illustrate some of the preceding points plus additional ones. Recreation sites The challenge in recreation sites is to encourage large numbers of people to enjoy a limited set of types of recreation in a ﬁnite space without ‘‘loving the place to death,” i.e., degrading the site and its resources (Knight and Gutzwiller 1995, Liddle 1997). Separating intensive recreation from nature-based recreation is a major principle. Intensive recreation spots, such as ballﬁelds, playgrounds,

29

30

Planning land and picnic areas, handle large numbers of people, provide a reasonable diversity of recreation types, and tend to have nature obliterated. These intensively used spots are located near access points and far from the most valuable natural resources present. A trail system providing access for nature-based recreation, such as birdwatching, photography, and quiet walking, channels walkers through natural areas. Planning and maintaining the trail layout to avoid or protect the most valuable natural resources is a key goal. Recreation is an important component widely supported by society. Managing recreation sites requires strategic land planning because of ﬂuctuations in budgets, numbers of people entering, and even types of recreation requested and provided. Nature reserves Nature reserves may have limited recreation, but involve other major planning and management issues due to the sensitivity and often rarity of the nature being protected. In the classic question of the relative importance of content and context (Forman 1987), clearly both are important for a nature reserve. The valuable nature is the content. The context surrounding area normally involves multiple land ownership and multiple management goals, many of which remain well beyond the nature reserve planner and manager to affect. Nevertheless, as for all protected lands, controlling inputs from outside is a major focus. However, planning and managing the internal resource, nature, is often a different challenge. Should we leave it alone and ‘‘let nature take its course”? Ecologists no longer believe in the so-called ‘‘balance of nature,” but rather see a non-equilibrium nature, where species and environmental conditions are continually changing (Pickett and White 1985, Peterken 1996, Lindenmayer and Burgman 2005). Therefore, if nature is left alone in the protected reserve, we expect and predict that it will look different in the future. A dominant species may decrease and be replaced by another species that increases and becomes dominant. A rare species, even a rare natural community, may disappear. Pond sediment may noticeably accumulate, stream habitats may increase or decrease, and different insect populations may explode or disappear. That’s nature. This non-equilibrium perspective means that the nature reserve will look different, often very different, to people over time. Leaving nature alone may or may not be a worthwhile planning strategy. It is particularly difﬁcult on a small nature reserve in an urban region. Alternatively, a nature reserve can be more intensively managed to achieve a different goal. Restoration could attempt to return nature to a mimic of a former state, such as old-growth or pre-settlement conditions or how it was when we were young (Primack 2004, Groom et al. 2006, Lindenmayer and Burgman

Planning and land management

Figure 2.1 Wooded hillslope adjacent to city that provides many natural and societal values. Land management against human overuse protects recreational opportunity, cultural sites, biodiversity, erosion/sedimentation beneﬁts, ﬂood control values, and cool air that helps ventilate the city of heat and air pollutants on still nights. Kyoto, Japan. R. Forman photo.

31

32

Planning land 2005). However, just as for historic building restoration and preservation, determining what the place looked like, the basic goal, and how attainable the goal is remains problematic. Management might, for example, periodically burn an area to reduce colonizing woody plants and produce a grassland with rare grassland species. But maybe the former grassland being mimicked was itself simply a product of human economic activity, such as burning shrubs to stimulate grass for sheep grazing (Foster and Aber 2004). Or management might attempt to minimize the presence of non-native invasive species. As suggested above, in an urban region with a dense human population, manifold widespread activities, and outward urbanization spread, attempting to control non-native species is reminiscent of Cervantes’ Don Quixote tilting with windmills. Still, maybe a large nature reserve is one of the few places in the urban region where the goal may be worthwhile. Keeping our eye on habitat loss and nature’s richness is far more important. Wetlands Wetland planning and conservation is particularly relevant and important in an urban region, in part because wetlands tend to be scarce. Most were drained and ﬁlled over history as human activities spread and intensiﬁed. Protecting the marshes, swamps, acid peatlands, and other wetlands that remain in an urban region is a valuable societal priority. Wetlands provide ecosystem services, including ﬂood-hazard reduction and stormwater pollutant removal, plus many other values from recreation to aesthetics and biodiversity protection (Keddy 2000, Mitsch and Gosselink 2000, Parsons et al. 2002). However, mosquitoes and public health problems may also be present (Robinson 1996). Wetlands have water at or above ground level for a prolonged period most years. Three wetland characteristics are primary: hydrologic conditions, lowoxygen soils, and so-called wetland vegetation. Planning and management of a wetland must focus on its surroundings, especially in the direction of incoming water. Wetland restoration may include mitigating degraded wetlands or creating new ones. Establishing wetland vegetation and associated wildlife is the visible part appreciated by society. However, wetland restoration mainly depends on getting the hydrology right (Salvesen 1994, Mitsch and Gosselink 2000, Keddy 2000, France 2003). Three components are essential: establishing the right water level to support wetland vegetation, maintaining the necessary entering ﬂows (and hence water source), and sustaining both inputs and water levels through drought and ﬂood periods over time. Tiny wetlands, particularly seasonal ones, may be created at the ends of stormwater drainage pipes. Several types and sizes of wetlands may be restored at the base of certain hills and mountains, and particularly in ﬂoodplains with a high water table. Large wetland complexes may

Conservation planning be restored in low elevation areas. Because of the typical scarcity and degraded state of wetlands in an urban region, their successful restoration can be expected to have a noticeable beneﬁt for both nature and the public. Also, wetland species quickly colonize wet spots, so restoration success tends to be rapid. Finally, successful land planning and management normally requires a reasonable level of public knowledge and support. Land can be managed directly, but is better managed when preceded by planning. Still better is adaptive management which incorporates new knowledge and planning on an ongoing basis. Management of a protected area by local people is valuable, because they know and care about the local area. Management by government or experts from afar is valuable, because they bring a broader perspective and expertise, and are less affected by narrowly focused local interests. Probably combined management by local and broad outside expertise is usually optimal for sustaining the resources protected. This combination may also be more likely to provide the political and public support needed for long-term protection. Furthermore, public perception plays a key role. If the public perceives that a place is beautiful or appealing, that translates into both public support and ultimately political support (Yaro et al. 1990, Nassauer 1997, Eaton 1997, Forman 2002a, Johnson and Hill 2002, Berkowitz et al. 2003). Aesthetics is embedded in culture, a deep and persistent force providing stability (Seddon 1997, Nassauer 2005). If people are culturally tied to a place, long-term protection is facilitated.

Conservation planning Conservation planners must be sustained by rare idealism, as every day and in almost every place they are faced by, paraphrasing Aldo Leopold, a world of wounds. The wounds are festering, the land degrading. However, let us start this section with the values, resources, and types of conservation. Then we add the processes of land protection, planning, and management. In conservation planning, a storied literature lays out the theories, controversies, trends, and successes (Noss and Cooperider 1994, Robin 1998, Dale and Haeuber 2001). Impressive, perceptive, even courageous US leaders here would certainly include Henry David Thoreau, George Perkins Marsh, John Muir, Theodore Roosevelt, Gifford Pinchot, Aldo Leopold, Marjorie Stonenan Douglas, Wendel Berry, and Edward O. Wilson, among others. Values and resources of conservation

Without conserving a resource, loss follows and we are incrementally poorer. Without long-term conservation, nature and people become impoverished. Although conservation is certainly important for historic buildings and heritage sites, here we focus on the much bigger picture of conservation of

33

34

Planning land nature and natural resources. Soil, biodiversity, rivers, forests, game, nature as a whole, and much more, require conservation planning from local project to mega-project. Big money and massive land areas are involved. Consider nature’s richness or biodiversity. For society, this provides many ecosystem services (nature’s services), such as soil erosion control and pollination for food production, a range of extractable products including medicines and foods, and intrinsic values such as aesthetics, nature recreation, and inspiration (Wilson 1992, Noss and Cooperider 1994, Lindenmayer and Burgman 2005). The phrase, ‘‘extinction is forever,” also underlines the importance of biodiversity. Rare and representative natural communities, as well as rare and representative species, are to be conserved. Rare species are subdivided into various categories, such as endangered/threatened, and rare at global, national, state/province, and local town/county levels. Conservation of all of these biodiversity categories is planned for, though efforts are highly uneven around the world. One type of rare species is not considered, the non-native species. Usually this is a new immigrant, and the concern is that it may become an invader that could degrade a natural community. The urban region differs in two important ways from other areas. First it contains a high human density with intense diverse human activities on the land, which threaten the persistence of any sensitive species or natural community present. Second, outward urbanization from a city is widespread and often rapid, which, especially in the case of sprawl, further threatens rare species in the region. These two issues of human density and human expansion highlight a conservation-planning problem for urban regions and society. How much effort should be placed into protecting an existing rare native species in an urban region? If the species or natural community is globally or nationally rare, conservation is important, even though the long-term probability of success for the species at that location may be low (Beatley 1994). The rare species might persist, and later spread to a more promising location(s) outside the urban region. If rarity of the species is at a ﬁner scale, such as a town or county, local efforts to protect it are appropriate. But society as a whole would better put its ﬁnite conservation efforts elsewhere. Types of conservation

Now consider the big conservation picture. Planning and management for lots of critical resources fall under this umbrella. Soil conservation involves planting native and sometimes tough non-native plants, along with a range of soil modiﬁcations and treatments, to control water and wind erosion which occurs over extensive areas of land. Forest resource conservation focuses on minimizing wildﬁre, soil erosion, road construction, and overcutting, plus addressing lots of other uses including recreation and water supply. Game or

Conservation planning wildlife conservation commonly involves land protection and management, plus enhancing populations for hunters and for the long term. River conservation, a particularly challenging issue in urban regions, typically involves riparianzone and surrounding-land inputs, natural-ﬂooding regimes, ﬁsh migration, and simply concrete in the ﬂoodplain and river, which forms dams, roadways, bridges, and diverse encroaching structures. Rangeland conservation emphasizes livestock effects, such as overgrazing, soil erosion, riverbank and river degradation, and obliteration of natural communities around wet spots. Water resources or aquatic-system conservation involves maintaining habitat diversity (especially bottom characteristics), waterside zones, ﬁsh, hydrology, physical/chemical/biological water-quality attributes, and outside impacts from logging, agriculture, livestock, and built areas. Conservation targeted to speciﬁc habitat types, such as acid bogs, salt marshes, rainforest, and streams, or to speciﬁc species, such as waterbirds, desert plants, and big ﬁsh, is common. Nature conservation includes all of these and is the optimum and prime target of conservation. Also, in contrast to, e.g., game or biodiversity or rangeland, almost everyone relates to and supports the idea of conserving nature. As noted in Chapter 1, natural systems are effectively nature, with the advantage of focusing on nature’s structural, functional, and change attributes. These attributes link tightly with conservation planning. A conservationist may ﬁnd the city or metropolitan area to be hopelessly complex and full of unpredictable people. Ironically, the urbanist may note the hopeless complexity of conservation, focused on so many critical resources and objectives of society spread over such a vast surface of the Earth. The urban planner is quite comfortable with preservation of historic buildings, heritage sites, and even cultural landscapes as a subﬁeld in its own right (Green and Vos 2001). Yet most of the issues in cultural site preservation are quite similar or analogous to those in many of the conservation subﬁelds. Land is protected, an internal resource managed, outside impacts minimized, portions undergo restoration, and costs are high. Land protection

Four perspectives are particularly valuable in understanding land protection: (1) organizations and results; (2) conservation by The Nature Conservancy; (3) large green patches and corridors; and (4) the metapopulation concept. Two types of land are the highest priorities for conservation protection: remote and large. Organizations and results Who protects land? Local units such as towns and counties normally protect small parcels. Even individuals may protect small parcels for a period.

35

36

Planning land Cumulatively a lot of land is protected in this way, but it is highly fragmented. Some resources can be protected in little parcels and some cannot. State and local land trusts and environmental organizations usually have adequate resources to protect only small lands. National and state/province governments tend to have the most capital and periodically invest in serious land protection. If conservation planning has been done, especially valuable large natural patches or areas, the ‘‘emeralds” on the land, can be protected. In large areas or patches almost all resources can be protected. Non-proﬁt or non-governmental organizations (NGOs), also, are major players in land protection. International organizations often direct conservation planning toward education and policy, though many also protect land. Some of the lands protected are large, such as tropical rainforest in Latin America and wildlife parks in Africa, including some crossing the borders of nations. National non-proﬁt organizations, also policy oriented, sometimes protect large areas and sometimes small ones. However, planning and partnering (collaboration) by various non-proﬁt organizations and/or government bodies can also protect a large area. More commonly, conservation planning by different groups adds land to a nucleus of protected land, in this way creating a large protected tract over time. Such a tract has multiple ownership, objectives, and management practices. Thus different management in each section tends to favor different local resources. Nevertheless large-area-dependent resources (Forman 1995), such as an aquifer or large-home-range vertebrate, usually do well because the different managers clearly see the importance of their section as part of the whole. Land-use planning occurs at all spatial scales from international and national to local. Some African parks cross national borders to protect migrating wildlife herds. National-level land-use planning is widespread including, for example in the USA, investments in the development of highways and associated land, transfer of water supplies between drainage basins, responses to disasters, dam and irrigation projects, and the dredging of channels and harbors (Babbitt 2005). Still, the week-by-week decisions on tiny spots by local ofﬁcials and local citizens represent a gargantuan enterprise, which molds the future and fragmented face of the land. The protection of land occurs in highly diverse ways. Perhaps all cases have two things in common: long-term protection, and protection of resources against human overuse. Long-term is effectively in contrast to short-term, and typically refers to decades, generations, or more, rather than years. Permanent or inperpetuity protection is often mentioned, but, at least in an urban region, that probably means until urbanization or human pressure and activity degrades the resource. Protection often means strong or not-so-strong legal constraints, which

Conservation planning usually can be altered by government, war, or other action. Effectively guarding and managing the resource is usually essential, and may be in combination with, or an alternative to, legal constraints. Conservation by The Nature Conservancy Conservation planning by The Nature Conservancy (TNC), the largest private landholder in the world, is highly developed and warrants brief description, particularly because of its use of regions. Ecoregions (Chapter 1) have been mapped worldwide by various sources (Groves et al. 2002, Anderson 2003, Magnusson 2004). They are the somewhat distinctive groupings of natural communities, plants, and animals over extensive land areas, and differ dramatically from society’s hierarchy of familiar administrative units with mapped political boundaries. The mission of TNC is the long-term protection of all plant and animal species and the habitats needed to support them. Ecoregional conservation identiﬁes and prioritizes a ‘‘portfolio” of conservation areas that should collectively conserve the biodiversity of each region delimited. A portfolio encompasses multiple examples of all native species and natural communities in sufﬁcient number, distribution, and quality to hopefully support their existence long term. Conservation planning then moves to the land protection phase, both by TNC and with ‘‘partner” agencies and organizations, to protect the lands identiﬁed. Terrestrial ecosystems are addressed at three spatial scales. ‘‘Matrix-forming” areas, such as extensive forest or rangeland, are at the scale of thousands to millions of hectares. Large patches are more delimited areas, some 2000 to 20 000 ha (5000 to 50 000 acres), with relatively distinct environmental conditions. Small patches are small sites with rare species dependent on unusual environmental conditions present. Combinations of these three scale types comprise a portfolio to protect the biodiversity of an ecoregion. Land protection planning for a particular project, of course, is complex and somewhat project-speciﬁc. How well a site ﬁts with the organization’s mission and with the determined ecoregion portfolio goal is important. Cost, balanced against available and expected ﬁnancial resources, is important. Threat to the resource and urgency for protection are important. Finally availability of the land for protection is important. Increasingly, broad-scale issues such as urbanization rate, a dropping water table, climate change, highway trafﬁc impact, roadlessness, and invasive species spread, are being considered in the planning. This TNC conservation planning and action approach has produced impressive results in North America and elsewhere. Still some major biodiversity issues have been little addressed with this approach. Marine ecosystems are essentially absent. Stream and river systems, together with their migratory ﬁsh, form connected linear networks that cut across these hierarchical area-focused

37

38

Planning land 1 A few large natural-vegetation patches 3 Connectivity between large patches 2 Vegetation along major streams

4 Small patches/corridors scattered across less-suitable matrix

5 Small patches/corridors clustered around large patches

Figure 2.2 Five priorities for nature conservation illustrated with the patch--corridor--matrix model. Patches and corridors are natural or semi-natural vegetation and the background matrix is less-suitable land use. Numbered in the typical order of conservation priority. Adapted from Forman (1995).

lands. Migratory birds depend on and move across many ecoregions. The TNC approach is unique and focused on regions. In contrast, each government agency and NGO and local organization has its own approach to conservation planning. Large green patches and corridors (emerald network ) For years I took photographs out of airplane windows around the world. Perhaps the most striking and ubiquitous pattern evident is the fragmentation of nature into little parcels. While habitat loss is overwhelmingly the giant cause of nature’s problems (Wilson 1992, Forman 1995, Wilcove et al. 1998), habitat degradation and habitat fragmentation are the two giants following in the scene. Most of the principles used by The Nature Conservancy for ecoregions could be used by planners and policymakers for familiar political/administrative units, such as nations, states/provinces, and counties/towns. Thus using the patch-corridor--matrix model (Chapter 1; Forman 1979b, 1995), the largest extensive natural patches can protect an aquifer, connected stream headwaters, largehome-range species (e.g., tigers and wolves), viable populations of interior species, and natural disturbance regimes (Figure 2.2). Analogously, large patches at a town scale can protect some of these resources, and small patches provide generally small, but different beneﬁts.

Conservation planning Connectivity, however, warrants more focus (Forman 1995, Bennett 2001, Fahrig 2003, Lindenmayer and Fischer 2006, Hilty et al. 2006). Vegetated corridors, such as water-protection riparian strips, wildlife-movement routes, and walking-trail routes, can connect the large patches. The next best way to provide connectivity is with stepping stones, the small sequential patches used by animals to cross a less-hospitable area. Connectivity and corridors, though much planned and used as greenways and greenbelts in urban areas, have been more slowly incorporated in conservation plans. One historical reason was ecologists’ slow recovery after a 1980s controversy about the efﬁcacy of natural corridors, despite an empirical and conceptual literature overwhelmingly supporting their importance. The second more important reason is that large patches are almost universally agreed to be the highest conservation priority for land areas, and connectivity, e.g., by green corridors, a second priority. In other words, conservationists do not see a network of green corridors, such as a greenway network, as the prime objective. Rather, a group of large natural patches or emeralds is the top priority goal. Connecting them with green corridors is the second priority (Saunders and Hobbs 1991, Noss and Cooperider 1994, Forman 1995, Lindenmayer and Burgman 2005). That sequential combination achieves the big conservation objective provided by an emerald network (Forman 2004a). The metapopulation concept One ecological concept, the metapopulation, has recently emerged as particularly important for land planning and protection. A metapopulation is a population subdivided into spatially separate groups, with some movement of individuals among groups (McCullough 1996, Hanski and Gilpin 1997, Lindenmayer and Burgman 2005, Groom et al. 2006). For instance, foxes (or deer or kangaroos) on four equal-sized patches with periodic dispersal among the patches represent a metapopulation. In an urban region human activities are constantly removing large or extensive natural habitat, leaving separate small patches as fragments of nature. Thus a large fox population in the former large natural area is converted to four small subpopulations. Over time, small (sub)populations ﬂuctuate more in size, and have more inbreeding and resulting genetic problems, than do large populations. As a result of these two characteristics, demographic and genetic, small populations have a greater probability of disappearing or going locally extinct on a patch. Landscape fragmentation leaves the foxes on each of the four small patches with a dubious future. An important alternative to four small patches is a metapopulation distributed on one large patch and three small ones. In this case, both demographic ﬂuctuation and genetic inbreeding effects are reduced, because the large patch is

39

40

Planning land a major source of outward-moving foxes. Some animals reach the small patches. That relatively continuous inﬂux helps prevent a small subpopulation from dropping to very small. It also brings new genes to the small patch, reducing the detrimental effects of inbreeding. In effect, the presence of a large natural patch provides a brighter future for foxes in the landscape, and also for foxes in the small fragments of nature surrounded by human land uses. In this way land protection of large patches helps sustain biodiversity as a whole. Spatial land planning for protection and management can provide additional beneﬁts that improve the persistence of species on small patches. Local species extinction or disappearance from patches followed by recolonization of the patches is referred to as metapopulation dynamics. Attributes of the patch primarily affect local extinction rate, whereas attributes between patches mainly affect recolonization. Large patch size and high-quality habitat on the patch reduce the chance of a subpopulation size dropping to zero, i.e., local extinction. Increasing recolonization rate, in turn, beneﬁts from patches being near rather than far apart, from the presence of a connecting natural corridor or row of stepping stones, and from higher-quality habitat conditions between patches. Protecting and managing land to reduce local extinction and increase recolonization provides a brighter future for species, including foxes, on the numerous small natural-habitat fragments in the urban region.

Planned cities Since planning and urban regions are key themes in this book, we now turn to the ambitious projects of whole cities that have been planned and built, in order to gain insights into urban regions. City and urban planning and its rich intellectual history, theory, diverse approaches, and examples, provide the framework (Sutcliffe 1980, Ravetz 2000, Willis et al. 2001, Hall 2002, LeGates and Stout 2003, Campbell and Fainstein 2003, Berke et al. 2006). Case studies and giants in the ﬁeld predominate, though guidelines and theories somewhat emergent from history and persona exist. Still, it would be hard to articulate, for example, US urban planning today without mentioning Frederick Law Olmsted, David Burnham, Jane Jacobs, Robert Moses, Benton MacKaye, Rexford Tugwell, Lewis Mumford, Ian McHarg, and even, perhaps, Britain’s Patrick Geddes. Today’s theories to guide planning partly rest on earlier ‘‘basic” principles, such as settlement, location, concentric-ring, industry, central-place, neighborhood-unit, and circulation theories (Hall 2002). Olmsted used protoecology principles in his work, and Geddes frequently cited biological models, ranging from nature to the human body, for his planning.

Planned cities Insights from Brasilia and other cities

Probably most cities display the imprint of strong centralized planning and building at times in their history. The prominent square cities of Northern China, medieval rounded hilltop cities of Europe, and early semi-circular cities by major water bodies come to mind. By today’s standards these are relatively small areas. Sections of cities produced by central planning are also conspicuous, such as Tokyo’s ancient ‘‘Edo” design for buildings and mini-greenspaces, Paris’ nineteenth-century boulevard area, and Barcelona’s eight-sided city-block buildings with inside courtyard and outside mini-neighborhoods. However, the prime interest here is to gain insights into urban regions from more-recent cities essentially planned from the start. Four are oft discussed in planning circles (Hall 2002): Chandigarth (India), New Delhi, Brasilia, and Canberra. The last three became the national capitals of India, Brazil, and Australia, respectively. The new Indian cities were built near existing population centers, while Brasilia and Canberra were built in relatively remote, low-population areas at the time. Chandigarth was perhaps more designed than planned. Architectural form and aesthetics played a central role rather than planning for the diverse needs of people. A relatively small area was planned, with glorious pieces within it intensively designed. The surrounding urban region of the time received little emphasis. The city rapidly grew in population, quickly overrunning or expanding beyond the original design. New Delhi, today a major world city, reﬂected a more balanced combination of planning and design. People’s needs, from transportation and housing to water, wastes, and recreation, were seriously addressed. Stunning structures worthy of a national capital were also incorporated in places. New Delhi’s population mushroomed, soon overwhelming some of the original plan’s area and expectations. But extracting urban region lessons from New Delhi is difﬁcult because it was built on the outskirts of Delhi, already a large city. The plan for Brasilia also represented a balance between design of structures and their combinations and planning for people’s diverse requirements (Hall 2002). Population growth rapidly spread over and beyond the plan. The original urban region received some overall planning, e.g., for two huge parks sandwiching the city, but today’s urban region (Color Figure 9) extends well beyond the original vision. The central portion exhibits some of the grandeur appropriate for one of the largest nations of the world. Housing for residents is concentrated in several separate communities, now small cities, and public transport is widespread. Convenient parks provide recreation. Wetlands

41

42

Planning land are relatively protected, an unusual situation in urban regions. A large reservoir adjacent to the city provides aesthetics and recreation, and originally, water supply. Serious planning shortcomings for Brasilia quickly became evident. Housing for the poor was limited, and informal squatter communities (Perlman 1976, Main and Williams 1994) appeared in numerous locations, most considered inappropriate by planners and existing residents. Some settlements invade and degrade designated park areas. Food and agriculture, a foundation of any community, seem to have been largely overlooked by the planners. Suitable soils for cropland are scarce in the region, and a surprising amount of food is imported at considerable cost. The reservoir initially provided clean water, but soon became polluted, because built areas were designed next to and upstream of it. Water quality has continued to decline. Despite such planning shortcomings, Brasilia, the nation’s center of government, has become a new and different star inland on the Cerrados plains and on the map of Brazil. Many other cities have been planned and built in a rural spot, or have covered a small earlier city, or have almost completely rebuilt an existing city, such as after war or other disaster. Curritiba (Brazil), Adelaide (Australia), Ankara, Washington, DC, and varied German cities are examples. In most cases, however, the vision planned was the city or a portion of the city, rather than its region. Two cities are mentioned as models of environmental sensitivity. Freiburg (Germany) has an unusual concentration of environmental solutions, including greenways for walking/biking, semi-natural areas with biodiversity, streetside stormwater detention swales and basins, trafﬁc calming, and green roofs. Curritiba (Brazil) has an environmental reputation partly because of successful implementation of speciﬁc projects that work, and partly because of its ‘‘marketing of ecology” which has created an image and stimulated people to work together for solutions (Schwartz 2004, Irazabal 2005, Moore 2007; Rodolpho Ramina, personal communication). Projects accomplished include: forest maintained on nearby hillslopes; seasonal linear parks which are mainly water-holding depressions along the ﬁve rivers; resistance to stream/river channelization, thus protecting downstream areas; protecting river headwater areas; housing near jobs with a vibrant economy; mass-transit emphasis; extensive tree-planting which includes fruit-bearing species. Urban liveability and recreational access, rather than ecology, were the central goals. No overall city plan guided actions (and apparently no scientist has yet evaluated the perception of environmental success). Now population has grown and expanded outward, so that urban region problems are worsening and planning seems important.

Planned cities Canberra, Australia

Canberra, the ﬁnal example of a planned city, is a contrast. From the air it appears as a few large strange blobs of European trees with sprinkled buildings, all surrounded by paddockland and bush (pastureland and woods), a perception pervasively conﬁrmed on the ground. The city was planned around a central reservoir with buildings largely kept well away from it (Color Figure 12). Aesthetics was important in designing boulevards and views, and axes lead the eye, not to dated human structures, but to the surrounding forested hills. Four town centers with surrounding residential areas were established, somewhat like close-by satellites surrounding the central city area. The ﬁve centers are separated by wide connected semi-natural areas. Each town center provides daily shopping needs and some cultural activity for its adjoining residential areas. The surrounding urban region is little planned except for extensive land protection to the west to maintain a water supply. Unlike the three previous examples, Canberra has grown slowly. Although well over the population envisioned in the plan, growth has mainly occurred as compact development on the outer edges of suburbs, and, in general, the population still ‘‘ﬁts” the plan. The Aborigine community is small though includes many leaders. Rather few Aborigines (Australian residents for some 50 000 years) from the outback have visited Canberra. Probably their reaction would be an analog of ‘‘it’s from another planet,” although it is hard to know how residents from the continent’s diverse outback areas would view a city (Layton 1989, Troy 1995, Forman 1995, Rigby 2006). Roads divide up the place into countless squares. Trafﬁc is noisy and dangerous. People put up fences everywhere which block views and movement. Dreaming (lines) may be disrupted or obfuscated. Sacred sites must have been destroyed. Food comes covered with plastic. The surroundings are sterile for walkabouts. Strange deciduous trees from afar corrupt the bush. The place is boring. It has no meaning. In contrast, most residents and visitors ﬁnd Canberra to be a pleasant green city with boulevards, parks, gardens, and many other greenspaces in the central city. At the core is a blue lake (reservoir) with clean water, partly protected by the green areas around it. Attractive buildings have appeared over time in the context of the city’s plan. Except for one massive communications tower that looms menacingly, development was basically kept off the slopes of the three surrounding nearby mountains. Utilities, including sewers, are connected to a site before houses can be built, which helps prevent sprawl. Some say the city is ‘‘very Australian” and residents already manifest a strong sense of place. The four nearby town centers with residential areas help create neighborhoods and active communities. Walking and bicycle trails seemingly connect

43

44

Planning land everything. The highway network is in the natural area, where it doubtless disrupts nature somewhat, rather than in or by residential areas. Everyone’s home is quite close to nature. Wildlife from nearby natural areas enriches the residential areas, as loud, brightly colored birds ﬂy in and wallabies hop in. Residents say, ‘‘It’s great for raising a family.” The close-by bush encourages exploration and imagination beyond the conﬁnes of a planned community. Yet Canberra is no Utopia. Visitors constantly run into circular and diagonal streets and get lost. Terrible wildﬁres occasionally sweep into the city consuming buildings and reducing air quality. Extensive water use (in a dry continent) is required to maintain extensive manicured greenspaces and everyone’s tidy gardens. Signs discourage people from swimming in the central lake for two days following a rainstorm, due to runoff of stormwater pollutants. Sprawl close to the city is rare, though it is beginning to occur >20 km out to the southeast in the urban region. The total area of the city is large compared with its limited population. Still, because the centers are separated, very little heat island effect or concentrated air pollution buildup is evident. Although town centers provide the basics, specialized needs such as a tuba lesson or a particular health clinic generally require considerable driving. Kangaroo--vehicle crashes are frequent, as are ‘‘roo-bars” in front of cars. Petroleum use and greenhouse gas production per person is high. Public transport is limited and not exactly rapid. A trolley or light rail system connecting the town centers and city center was envisioned and space provided in the design, but it was never built and remains a dream for some. Rich cultural resources such as museums and historic monuments are conspicuous, and recreational resources as well. Yet residents and critics periodically say the place is ‘‘dead” or ‘‘doesn’t have a soul” or ‘‘there’s no beach,” referring to the perceived limited cultural diversity and nightlife. Some claim the situation results from Canberra being a government city. Others blame it on the original plan which disperses people, thus limiting growth of the central city. Canberra highlights an intriguing perceptual framework. Hardly anyone can feel emprisoned in the claustrophobic hallways and cells of most major cities. The freedom of greenspace is always but a step away. Yet the city’s built areas and greenspaces, the latter largely covered with mowed grass and planted tree lines, are so planned, so tightly ﬁtting, that to some everything seems predictable, dominating, constraining, even boring. Planning and design have permanently snuffed out opportunities for imagination and creativity. Yet take but another step outward, and one ﬁnds nature, with rocks and gum trees and butterﬂies and venomous snakes and koalas. Exploration and imagination and experimentation are available near everyone’s doorstep. For Canberra, the urban region was a marginal part of the planning vision, mainly included to protect the land surrounding its water supply. Yet because

Urban-region planning of relatively slow population growth, today’s Canberra region remains relatively viable. In contrast, Brasilia rapidly outgrew the planner’s vision, an ironic measure of success. Today Brasilia’s much larger urban region displays rather few marks of effective overall planning.

Urban-region planning Regional planning, such as a regional rail-transportation system or the TVA dam system (Tennessee, USA), was introduced in Chapter 1. Here planning of urban regions lies center stage (Geddes 1915, MacKaye 1940, Barker and Sutcliffe 1993, Steiner 1994, Simmonds and Hack 2000, Ravetz 2000, Hall 2002). Issues addressed, such as water supply, wastes, and commuter routes to recreation areas, are no longer solvable by cities or even metropolitan areas (Rowe 1991, Simmonds and Hack 2000, Tress et al. 2004, Ozawa 2004, Berger 2006). Even where the planning imprint is strong, much of a region’s form has resulted from uneven ﬁner-scale plans, and particularly from little-planned or unplanned forces. Consider brieﬂy some urban region examples, from Beijing to Boston. Examples and approaches

Beijing is unusual because essentially one strong central government controls and plans the entire urban region outward to about 100 km (65 mi) from the center city (Sit 1995, Gu and Kesteloot 1998, Chen et al. 2004, Yang 2004). A prominent concentric ring-road form, like progressively larger hula hoops, provides both major beneﬁts and problems. Parts of the seventh ring road are under construction and attempts to stitch in greenways are underway. A huge increase in vehicles and trafﬁc, tree planting, removal of old buildings, soft-coal burning for power, air pollution, and greenhouse gas production characterizes this centrally planned urban region. Brisbane (Australia) also has a single centralized government for its region (Troy 1996). Such strong centralized planning, which avoids the multiple-stakeholder process and proverbial least-common-denominator committee-report plan, is faster and better able to produce big change. Yet without checks-and-balances, the result may be good or bad, often depending on the degree of subsequent acceptance by the public. Moscow, Berlin, and Bucharest illustrate a quite-different conspicuous pattern, whereby essentially only large agricultural ﬁelds and large wooded areas cover the urban-region ring, a product of a long strong Soviet-dominated planning process. London’s greenbelt and Portland’s (USA) urban growth boundary are both products of government policy and planning (Munton 1983, Hall 2002, Avin and Bayer 2003, Ozawa 2004). Stockholm, Copenhagen, Melbourne, and perhaps in the future Nanjing City (China) are notable for prominent greenspace

45

46

Planning land wedges (Geddes 1915, Jim and Chen 2003) projecting into the metropolitan area, which result from government planning and policy. In contrast, the planner, Robert Moses, was the driving force behind a New York regional plan focused on a parkway system of roads and parks (Hall 2002). Still different, and simplifying a bit, Atlanta (USA) is extensively spread out on the land, perhaps largely a result of inexpensive oil and little regional planning (Bullard et al. 2000). Chicago’s region results, in part, from the combined forces of agribusiness spread, little-planned suburban sprawl, much-planned city sections, and socioeconomic policies (Cronon 1991, Hall 2002). Unplanned immigrant squatter settlements are prominent in the Tegucigalpa (Honduras) and Rio de Janeiro regions (Perlman 1976, Main and Williams 1994). Small farm ﬁelds and villages cover the London, Hannover (Germany), and Nantes (France) regions, mainly unplanned by government, but maintained by policies. Transit-oriented development (TOD) focuses urbanization growth around stations on commuter-rail lines, an important urban-region planning approach (Cervero 1998, Gomez-Ibanez 1999, Ozawa 2004, Dittmar and Ohland 2004, Handy 2005). Compact mixed-use development, including shopping, multi-unit housing, and small-lot single-family homes, is connected by convenient walkways within an 800 m (half-mile) radius of the station (e.g., San Diego, Los Angeles, Sydney). Providing walkable employment opportunities would further enhance a low-vehicleuse community. Transit-oriented development communities contrast with highvehicle-use sprawl areas and ‘‘edge cities” (Garreau 1991). Although transitoriented development emphasizes development and transportation, it could be noticeably improved by a focus on greenspaces in the community. This design capitalizes on the human need for nature (Wilson 1984, Kaplan et al. 1998, Donahue 1999, Hobbs and Miller 2002, Kellert 2005), and avoids the perception of suburban living hemmed in by buildings and concrete. Frederick Law Olmsted’s celebrated late-nineteenth-century Emerald Necklace planning for Boston was largely along the city’s edge, rather than over its region (Zaitzevsky 1982, Warner 2001). Shortly thereafter Charles Eliot developed plans for a Boston greenbelt with walking trail well out from the city, a good example of regional planning. The greenbelt was not established, one of countless regional plans that were not implemented. Today a circular walking trail passes through a handful of large greenspace patches. Regional greenway systems or networks are being pieced together around San Francisco, Chicago, Minneapolis/St. Paul (USA), and many other cities by coalitions of interests (Ahern 2002, Jongman and Pungetti 2004, Erickson 2006). Urban region solutions may emerge from diverse ﬁelds (Orr 2002), as the accomplishments of landscape architect Olmsted emphasize. Thinking big, practically, and ‘‘outside the box,” he successfully integrated recreation, ﬂood control, transportation, vegetation, sewage treatment, and aesthetics. Fortuitously,

Urban-region planning today some landscape architects, building beyond aesthetics and amenities in small spaces, are elevating serious ecological science, urban planning, and other key ﬁelds to the forefront for solutions. A region could be transformed by planning in a number of ways. First, the big project, such as Arthur Morgan’s TVA dam-system project in the US South and Robert Moses’ New York parkway system (Morgan 1971, Hall 2002), is what many people think about for regional planning. Design a regional plan so brilliantly that, after public review and reﬁnements, government implements it as a whole. A second approach, call it the planned trajectory approach, effects a policy change which establishes a trajectory of change. The Portland urban growth boundary is an example, whereby few people could see anything different after ﬁve years, small differences were widespread after 10 years, and from 20 years onward Portland looked quite distinct from all other US cities (Avin and Bayer 2003, Ozawa 2004). Another approach, effectively a land-mosaic or puzzle-pieces plan, provides for implementable changes in small-to-mid-size areas that ﬁt together to form the whole region; no pieces are left out. The Greater Barcelona Region landmosaic plan illustrates this, whereby planning solutions for each separate portion, as well as for small features repeated across the land, were outlined (Forman 2004a). Planners have long valued, even emphasized, urban greenspaces mainly for people (Rowe 1991, Warren 1998, Ishikawa 2001, Clark 2006). The emphasis on ecology and key environmental dimensions has become prominent more recently (Platt et al. 1994, Atkinson et al. 1999, Ravetz 2000, Steinitz and McDowell 2001, White 2002, Steiner 2002, Orr 2002, Marsh 2005, Hilty et al. 2006). This trend seems partly due to increasing recognition of the central importance of ecological dimensions in the city and its region, and partly to society’s interest in sustainability. These approaches use the science of ecology, instead of simply coloring in green bushes and trees on and among city buildings. The ecology used is still introductory or general, but the trend harbors well for the future in planning. In parallel with this trend, a few urban regions are now being studied as a whole by teams of ecologists and other experts. Prominent among these are Melbourne (McDonnell et al. 1997, van der Ree and McCarthy 2005, Hahs and McDonnell 2007), Baltimore (Nilon and Pais 1997, Pickett et al. 2001, Pickett 2006), Phoenix (USA) (Jenerette and Wu 2001, Luck and Wu 2002, Grimm et al. 2003), and Berlin (Sukopp et al. 1995, Breuste et al. 1998, Kowarik and Korner 2005). Fortuitously, the predominant scientiﬁc paradigms and approaches vary in the different urban regions. The key paradigms include urban-to-rural gradient, landscape ecological pattern, watershed analysis with water and material ﬂows, dynamics of plant and animal communities (biotopes), and the city as an ecosystem with energy and material ﬂows. Though not done for the objective

47

48

Planning land of planning, doubtless these regions will noticeably gain from the pioneering urban-ecology studies. Major environmental components of plans

A particularly interesting example of ecologically focused regional planning is the Multiple Species Conservation Plan (MSCP) for San Diego County, which is roughly the San Diego (California) region (adjacent to the Tijuana, Mexico region) (Color Figure 32). A single environmental goal, protecting biodiversity, was the focus. Three groups, ecological, development/ﬁnancial, and governmental (federal, state, and local), planned jointly (Beatley 1994, Babbitt 2005, DiGregoria et al. 2006). In essence, the results were an agreed-upon map and strategy to protect a system of large greenspaces and connecting corridors, and thereby essentially remove ecological constraints on development elsewhere in the region (Figure 2.3). Ecologists concluded that the greenspace network would sustain the bulk of (but probably not all) the region’s biodiversity, and developers were able to invest and build in areas outside the network with fewer uncertainties and time delays. Government played honest broker, also protecting both of the other parties in case new information convincingly showed that the map needed adjustment in spots. Signiﬁcantly, government put money on the table to help with land acquisition and management. About a third of the greenspace was protected when the plan was developed. A decade later about two-thirds of the areas were protected. Not surprisingly, most of the difﬁcult protection projects remained for the ﬁnal third. Even at the two-thirds point though, the MSCP plan is a remarkable success story and model for other urban regions. Also, the network of connected large natural patches (Chapter 1) used for San Diego’s biodiversity corresponds closely with the emerald network integrated into a multiple-objective land-mosaic plan for the Greater Barcelona Region (Forman 2004a). Only one environmental dimension, air pollution, requires regional planning in all large US cities. For air quality, a major project in an urban region, such as a new highway or industrial park, must be evaluated in a rather lengthy data-collecting and modeling process before approval and construction (Forman et al. 2003). The proposer must provide convincing evidence that regional air quality will not signiﬁcantly decline. Urban impacts on coastal areas also require regional evaluation and planning. This basic regional-planning concept, using somewhat different models, would apply nicely to other environmental dimensions. Hydrologic ﬂows/ ﬂooding and biodiversity are two obvious areas where urban regional evaluation and planning would be of signiﬁcant beneﬁt to society. Other key environmental dimensions such as wildlife movement, water pollution, and ﬁsh migration might be regionally planned, individually or in some combination. Providing

Urban-region planning

CALIFORNIA

Major green patches (Biological core areas)

Escondido

Major green corridors (Biological linkages)

Carlsbad

Regional boundary Ramona

Miles 0

5

0 8 Kilometers

Del Mar El Capitan Reservoir

N

PACIFIC OCEAN

La Jolla

Ocean Beach

Loveland Reservoir

San Diego Jamul National City

Point Loma

Dulzura

Imperial Beach Tijuana

MEXICO

Figure 2.3 Major patch-and-corridor system of natural vegetation (emerald network) in plan for the San Diego Region, California. Adapted from The New York Times, February 16, 1997, page 1.

evidence that regional levels of such environmental dimensions would not be degraded by a proposed major project would be a tangible measurable manifestation of a sustainable urban region. Hierarchical, economic, and political problems are familiar constraints on a regional approach to planning (Forman et al. 2004). Hierarchically, an urban region commonly lies within a broader state or province or nation, while a host of local political/administrative units such as towns or counties lie within the region. Land-use issues are routinely handled both at the broader state and narrower local levels (Babbitt 2005), but not at the urban-region level where many key problems needing solution emerge. Also, both states and local units often have strong governments with taxing and budgetary authority, as well as political leaders who are likely to have been appointed or elected with public support.

49

50

Planning land Inserted into this established hierarchy, a regional authority or planning organization has difﬁculty. It is likely to be seen as a threat, both from above and below. Moreover, it generally has a limited budget, limited political power, and a ﬁnite life before disappearing. Despite these handicaps, regional organizations play a valuable role for society. In some places they are the only voice for regional thinking and planning.

3

Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns

A friend suggested that a book on urban regions would focus overwhelmingly on economics. But that would unfairly place the ills, delights, and challenges of the world in one corner, whereas a range of human dimensions are central to understanding and solutions. Dividing the human condition into three overlapping categories -- economics, social patterns, and culture -- is convenient, though admittedly a simpliﬁcation. Culture is used in its core sense of fundamental aesthetic, intellectual, and moral traditions. This glimpse of the three big subjects, economics in this section, and social patterns and culture in the ﬁnal section, is obviously incomplete. Still, selected concepts, particularly linked with resource and environmental dimensions, provide useful foundations and insights.

Growth, regulatory, and ecological economics Key economic systems for considering natural systems and their uses in urban regions are presented as follows: (1) growth economics and regulatory economics, which are familiar and in various combinations currently predominate in urban regions; and (2) ecological economics for resources and the environment, which is growing, because in many ways it complements and addresses the shortcomings of the familiar approaches. A few background observations are helpful. First, most economic theories are essentially non-spatial. Places for people and habitats for species are basically ignored and unimportant in economic models. Yet since spatial arrangement is so important to understanding and policy in urban regions, linking economics and spatial pattern is included here. Second, for comparability and analysis, attempts are made to translate ‘‘everything” into a universal currency with the same units for direct comparability. The

51

52

Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns most familiar case is ascribing monetary value, such as euros, yen, or dollars, to things, a foundation of most economics. Converting everything to calorie equivalents is another approach (Odum 1973, Odum and Odum 1981). Yet a newer approach spreading in both economics and the public is the ecological footprint. In footprint analyses things are converted to area, such as hectares or acres, as a universal currency (Wackernagel and Rees 1996, Costanza 2000, Rees 2003, Luck et al. 2001). Growth and regulatory economics

Urban regions cut across all the current economic systems worldwide (World Bank 2006). The 38 regions considered in detail in this book cover most systems, varying, for example, from economics driven by strong market forces to strong government controls. The formal constructs of industrialized economies contrast with the informal ﬁnancial networks and traditions of some developing nations. Thus the current economic system of China applies poorly to France, that of Honduras poorly to Japan, and that of the USA poorly to Chad. Urban regions in all six of these countries are examined in later chapters. With roots in China, Europe, and elsewhere, economic growth emerged in the early 1940s as one of the ‘‘big ideas” of history (McNeill 2000). Growth economics is the widespread familiar approach embodied in the phrase, ‘‘Let the free market determine it.” Three characteristics are central (Dasgupta and Heal 1974, Romer 1990, Aghion and Howitt 1998, Gomez-Ibanez 1999, Jones 2002). Human consumers are the central players. Preferences and tastes are the predominant determining force. And the resource base is essentially limitless, because substitution or technology can overcome a limited resource. Thus for society, the goal is to sustain economic growth, with the assumption that this can continue forever. Success minimizes the ‘‘too high” and ‘‘too low” rates over time. For individuals, the goal is often to attain happiness or a high quality of life (Jacobs 1992, Costanza et al. 1997a, Kasser 2003, Easterlin 2003, Layard 2005). Broad economic measures of individual success usually focus on high economic status (wealth) or high consumption rate. The essentially limitless resource base assumes that, if a resource becomes scarce, another resource (a different type or trade from a different area) can be substituted or technologically developed (Dasgupta and Heal 1974, Aghion and Howitt 1998, Pearce and Ulph 1999, Jones 2002). Indeed, human-made capital can be substituted for natural resource inputs to production. Protecting or conserving natural resources reduces the need for substitution or technical progress. But more importantly in growth economics, the limitless resource base means that there is no essential need to protect a particular natural resource.

Growth, regulatory, and ecological economics Before considering the far-reaching implications of this assumption in the next section, we brieﬂy consider another familiar widespread economic system, regulatory economics. Government regulations, laws, and other limitations on free markets and freedom of action usually attempt to head off, or result from, crises or problems, or may result from planning for the future (Aghion and Howitt 1998, Jones 2002, Perman et al. 2003). The public may demand regulations or the government impose them. Also the regulations are policed by government with varying degrees of effectiveness. Crisis management and the solutions to problems generally involve relatively short-term regulatory actions. On the other hand, planning may involve long-term limitations, such as zoning for appropriate land uses, land protection for a park system, or investment in a transportation system. Government may be particularly suited for multi-sectoral optimization or ‘‘what if ” analyses, as well as implementation of their results. Governments often act and invest to meet demand. Such regulations are reactive rather than proactive. Sometimes government acts to open up opportunity. An array of institutional structures, economic instruments, and incentives may be used. Most government actions are relatively short-term and are usually somewhat dependent on changing levels of income. Regulations intrude on business and the free market, and too often suppress innovation. While they may protect the public against inept or unethical actions, regulations put limits on experimenting with new ideas and may protect mediocrity. Perhaps all national and urban economies have a combination of free-market growth and government regulation, and mainly differ by their position along the gradient between the two poles. As politics change, the economies slide, normally temporarily, along the gradient to right or left. Finally, corruption should be mentioned as an economic limitation though not a regulatory one. Corruption, which varies from high to low both spatially and temporally, may put limits on both the free market and government regulation. The relationship between population growth and economic growth is especially important around growing cities. In general, if suitable pre-conditions, such as various ﬁnancial institutions, are in place, population growth commonly leads to economic growth and development (Cheshire 1988, Ray 1998, Rogers et al. 2006). Fluctuations and adjustments in wages, prices, markets, credit, interest rates, employment, technological change, international trade, and other variables affect growth rates, and thus are important in economic models. Nevertheless, more people consume more resources, make more products, create larger markets, require more housing units, and affect a greater area.

53

54

Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns These simpliﬁed statements lead to two important attributes of urban regions (Fainstein and Campbell 1996, Ravetz 2000, LeGates and Stout 2003). Urban regions today are mushrooming in population, a trend much more due to immigration than to birth rate. Second, though housing goes upward in high-rises, development spreading outward at lower density has a much greater effect on natural resources and environmental conditions. Ecological economics for resources and the environment

For some characteristics, times, and places in the urban region, the time-tested growth economics combined with regulatory economics work well (Aghion and Howitt 1998, Jones 2002). But the third component, ecological economics, is a key to effectively understanding and dealing with natural systems and their values for people. Here we combine natural resources and environmental conditions in ecological economics, and differentiate this focus from the growth and regulatory approaches (Perman et al. 2003), although some economists use the core concepts in a broader, and some in a narrower, sense. Natural resources include both renewable and non-renewable resources. As might be considered in resource economics, they include both inputs into the economic system and resources undervalued or ignored by markets. At the other end are environmental conditions, for which environmental economics focuses on the by-products of production, wastes of consumption, and other human effects on natural systems. Ecological economics thus addresses the broad relationships between ecosystems and economics. Not surprisingly, since ecological economics provides solutions for major societal issues poorly addressed by other economic systems, it brings somewhat different core attributes to the table for society. These are summarized as follows (Costanza 1991, Costanza et al. 1997a): (1) (2)

(3) (4) (5)

Humans are one important component of, and dependent on, the overall system of natural processes and human activities. The core driving forces of preference, technology, social organization, and basic culture all evolve in response to ecological opportunities and constraints. This continuous adaptive evolution is not directional toward an equilibrium, but rather produces a ﬂuctuating non-equilibrium. Humans have understanding and intelligence, and can manage for or against an economic goal. Individual resources are ﬁnite and the overall resource base is limited. The long-term future is given importance alongside the short-term.

Growth, regulatory, and ecological economics (6)

Prudence based on uncertainty indicates that substitution and technology cannot indeﬁnitely remove resource constraints.

The values of ecological economics and the contrast with growth economics are striking (Romer 1990, Nordhaus 1992, Aghion and Howitt 1998, Jones 2002). Growth economics highlights humans being central, consumption driving the system, intelligence being subservient to short-term market trends, and substitution and technology eliminating resource scarcity. In ecological economics, people understand, adapt and plan both long- and short-term for the broader natural-and-human system (or urban region) of which they are a part. Resources are ﬁnite and, in the face of uncertainty and expected surprises, prudence dictates conservation of natural resources for a more secure economic future. Resources Resource economics primarily addresses the many forms of natural resources that represent input capital for an economy. From a broad perspective, land and water and even space in an urban region are resources. Speciﬁc resources, of course, range from prime agricultural soil to a rare mineral, an aquifer, a forest, or a recreational greenway. Resources may be scarce. They may approach depletion. They may be nearly all degraded. In each case no elegant economic model or ‘‘what if” exercise or agony about what the market indicates is needed to know that resource conservation is important (Dasgupta and Heal 1974, Perrings 1991, El Serafy 1991, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005). With the resource lost the region is inherently poorer. Although the valuation of natural resources is a complex subject beyond the scope here (Costanza et al. 1997b, Patterson 2002, National Research Council 2005), the value lost is partly the short-term reduction in capital. But more importantly the long-term loss is represented by the constantly evolving physical/chemical/biological roles played by the resource. In this sense some of the loss is immeasurable and irreversible. Planning and resource conservation are among the key solutions in resource economics. In market economics, usually a fair portion of the costs of resource use and pollution are shifted as externalities to the public, which pays taxes and fees to cover some of these costs. Since the full cost is rarely calculated or covered, resources and the environment degrade a little or a lot. In ecological economics, more of the costs are shifted to the resource users and the polluters. Consequently more resources are conserved and less of the environment is degraded.

55

56

Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns

Essen City Forest Freiburg im Bergwald Frankfurt City Forest Berlin City Forest Recreation

Wildlife

Forest Production

Water Production

Mining reclamation

Climate & noise

Figure 3.1 Urban forests providing valuable ecosystem services in Germany. Relative intensity of use: 100 % black, very high; 75 % high; 50 % medium; 25 % low; 0 % very low. Adapted from Osband (1984).

Unmentioned above and poorly represented in most economic models are natural systems. Yet these address major stated objectives of society and provide enormous value (Daily 1997, Atkinson et al. 1999, Dailey and Ellison 2002, Ravetz 2000, White 2002, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005). Most natural-systems values are quite familiar and taken for granted, until they are in short supply or run out. Clean water supply is a big and rapidly growing problem in numerous growing urban regions. Natural vegetation covering an aquifer is arguably the best way to sustain a clean-water supply (Figure 3.1). The natural vegetation provides this key ‘‘service” to society, and requires protection. Long-term naturalsystems protection is a small cost compared with the service value provided to millions of people in the city. Nature’s services (natural-systems services, natural capital, nature’s values) or ecosystem services (those where natural organisms play central roles) are widespread (Daily 1997, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005, National Research Council 2005) and are especially provided by diverse types of greenspace. Nearby natural recreation areas, especially forested, provide a valuable service to city residents. Wetlands that absorb stormwater and reduce ﬂooding provide a service to the city. Vegetated stream corridors reduce erosion and sedimentation. Natural soils absorb and break down chemical pollutants. The list of ecosystem services in urban regions goes on and on, each providing a key value to society

Growth, regulatory, and ecological economics (Kremen and Ostfeld 2005, Robertson 2006). Except perhaps for protecting a water supply, ecosystem services and biodiversity do not appear to be correlated (Peter Kareiva, personal communication). Not surprisingly, markets in ecosystem services are emerging (Daily and Ellison 2002, Robertson 2006). Formerly such values had a hard time ﬁtting into economic models -- variously referred to as non-market resources, externalities, market failure, the absence of a market, the underfunctioning of a market, the importance of informal markets, or an ‘‘e” term for environment added at the end to an equation. After protracted discussion among economists and others about steady-state economics (Boulding 1964, Daly and Cobb 1989, Daly 1990, Rogers et al. 2006), where resource conservation and the second law of thermodynamics are important foundations, natural resource economics and ecological economics (Costanza 1991, Jones 2002) have evolved and begun to reach front stage. However, this time the core community of economists has developed more robust models in which natural-systems values increasingly appear in some form. Indeed, as economic growth came to the forefront in the 1940s, thirty years later Rachel Carson and big environmental challenges altered the public consciousness and public policy (McNeill 2000). Environmentalism has been rapidly maturing as one of history’s ‘‘big ideas”, and economic models are mutating to keep up with or effectively address the developing paradigm. Conservation of resources, illustrated by the water supply and natural vegetation example above, is particularly important in urban regions, where land-topeople ratios are so limited. Traditional economic models have provided little motivation for resource conservation, for instance, because a scarce resource can be replaced by technological change or by changes in trade (Ray 1998, Pearce and Ulph 1999, Jones 2002). Still, societies that conserve their base retain a base to sustain them. Today oil-rich Norway apparently puts its income in the bank for future generations, and spends the (growing) interest gained from this investment (Karl 1997, Listhaug 2005). With a ﬁnite annual budget, the people lead no Shangri-la life and have an incentive to conserve (Davis et al. 2001). Their important land and sea resources continue to look good, and even improve. Meanwhile Norwegian children and grandchildren can look to a bright economic future because their parents and grandparents invested in the future. The environment Environmental economics is here paired with, and overlaps, resource economics. Focusing on the by-products of production, wastes of consumption, and human overuse of natural systems, this half of ecological economics is perhaps more familiar as an approach poorly served by market forces (Costanza 1991,

57

58

Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns Costanza et al. 1997b, Patterson 2002, Perman et al. 2003, Rogers et al. 2006). The heat, heavy metals, hydrocarbons, pesticides, nitrogen and phosphorus, noise, CO2 , and much more resulting from both production and consumption are often lumped as pollutants. Some call these (economic) resources out of place, which underlies, for example, recycling programs and industrial ecology that do operate within markets. Indeed wastes are an important and normal part of the production process and of society (Berger 2006). Such wastes are ‘‘everywhere,” especially across the urban region, a huge challenge offering rich economic and design opportunities. Nevertheless, most pollutants are unwanted and degrade environmental conditions. Widespread environmental impact analyses evaluate the levels of pollutant effects on natural resources and their value to people. Prevention, avoidance, and conservation efforts to reduce pollution effects on natural systems are common, and may or may not be costly. However, efforts to mediate, mitigate, and compensate pollutant effects are also made, often at considerable cost. The giant in environmental economics is the degradation effect by these pollutants on natural and human resources. Aquifers, lakes, streams, estuaries, and seas suffer. Soil, diverse natural communities, wildlife, and rare species suffer. Recreation and aesthetics suffer. Human health suffers. The economic losses due to these production by-products and the wastes from human consumption are staggering and growing. With the failure of market and regulatory approaches, ecological economics has evolved to address them. While pollutants are the core of environmental problems, a small but increasing degradation of resources is occurring from the presence of humans themselves. Population growth, urban sprawl, transportation, and technology are placing more people in more remote areas. The direct and indirect effects of this pattern are threatening and degrading more wildlife populations, rare species, natural communities, aquatic ecosystems, and ﬁsh populations. Ecological rather than market or regulatory economics is the key again here. As mentioned in the preceding section, the degradation of resources by pollution and human overuse is a form of resource loss (Dasgupta and Heal 1974). Urbanization and associated pollution of the only good aquifer in an urban region is an obvious loss. Its short-term valuation based on costly substitution is readily calculated, whereas its long-term role as water supply, changing forest products source, soil-erosion protector, biodiversity protector, and changing recreation resource is difﬁcult to estimate. In contrast, the diverse ramiﬁcations of increased urban heat and increased stormwater runoff, due to extensively replacing greenspace with impermeable paved areas cannot be estimated with any conﬁdence. Consider the lost functions and the new costs for air-conditioning, industry, domestic water use, changed precipitation patterns,

Economics in time, space, and footprints summer tourism, street trees, ﬂood frequency, ﬂood heights and damage, scouring of streams/rivers, ﬁsh populations and recreation, and stormwater pollutants carried into water bodies. The economic effects of an extensive loss of the greenspace resource are too widespread and uncertain at present, and into the future, to conﬁdently estimate. Many other resources in the urban region fall into this category. Whereas the preceding discussion focuses on resource protection and pollution avoidance and minimization, many of the same points apply to restoration, mitigation, and compensation for sites or areas already degraded by pollution and human overuse (Salvesen 1994, Cuperus et al. 2001, Forman et al. 2003). Restoration is a return to some previous state, which in the urban region typically means to semi-natural vegetation with little pollution. Mitigation means to minimize the effects of, which can be accomplished in many ways. Compensation, where mitigation seems impossible, means to provide beneﬁts off-site equivalent to the losses on-site. A signiﬁcant reduction in pollutant input and human usage, plus clean up of the accumulated pollutants, is usually assumed in restoration and mitigation projects.

Economics in time, space, and footprints An important range of factors affecting urban region economics are presented in three categories: (1) time, stability, and sustainability; (2) spatial arrangement; and (3) ecological footprints. Time, stability, and sustainability

Occasionally over pre-history and history cities have been wiped off the map by wars, ‘‘natural” disasters, or climate change. Now greenhouse-gas buildup with an expected 0.5 to 5+ m sea-level rise may eliminate more. Nevertheless most urban regions are nearly permanent, and are especially suitable for longterm thinking and action. The concepts of uncertainty, adaptability, and stability are all focused on the long term rather than short term. These are familiar to industries that expect to persist. The time period is decades or human generations, exactly the time period usually considered for sustainability. Stability Numerous solutions for issues such as uncertainty, surprises, ﬂexibility, adaptability, and stability exist and have been proposed. Methods of analysis are equivalently diverse, from simple comparisons of options based on principles and distinctive features on the land to computer simulation modeling of complex systems (biological and/or social) with uncertainty levels, spatial remote-sensing/GIS

59

60

Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns data, and sensitivity analyses (El Serafy 1991, Perrings 1991). A few solutions are listed as illustrations, but governments and non-governmental organizations in each urban region will have their own issues and methods to achieve these goals for the long term. The following approaches normally enhance ﬂexibility, adaptability, and stability in an urban region: (1) conserve land; (2) protect speciﬁc resources; (3) develop buffers; (4) store resources; (5) diversify activities; (6) change technologies; (7) maintain diverse types of resources; (8) maintain redundancy, e.g., 3--5 examples of each structure or resource type; (9) save the rarest pieces; (10) have high connectivity in the transport system; (11) maintain high circuitry (lots of loops) in the transportation network; (12) provide widespread modal choice in transportation; and (13) channel development to a few satellite cities rather than indeﬁnitely growing the central city. The reader’s ideas can probably double this list. To achieve stability two long-term overriding challenges need solutions. Get through tough periods. And adapt to a changing world. Consider the resident family on the outskirts of Kingston (Jamaica) or Jakarta who has a small fenced garden around the home. That garden may have dozens of species carefully planted and tended that provide food throughout the year: mangoes up top in a tree; an understory of coffee, bananas and papaya; manioc and other valuable shrubs; smaller plants below; vines in the right places; and chickens and other animals all around. The family is buffered from the sometimes devastating economic ﬂuctuations at the national level. Also, with a highly diverse (biodiverse) garden system, food plants may be seamlessly substituted to adapt to changing conditions. So, in addition to short-term economic activities, both the Norwegian nation and the Jamaican family have thought and invested in the long term. Economic game theory and ‘‘What if?” exercises can be done not only at these scales, but also for the urban region. Sustainability Sustainable development, sustainability, economic sustainability, sustainable environment, and so forth are much-used terms, yet little-used in this book, mainly because deﬁnitions vary all over the map and are usually tailored to the user’s objective (Daly 1990, Rogers et al. 2006). All sustainability concepts focus on the long term, over decades or generations, rather than the usual planning and design horizon of years or a couple of decades. All normally imply a balance between natural and human conditions. Sustainable development emphasizes development, and how to do it. Sustainability suggests an overall condition, often global in perspective. Sustainable environment suggests a more speciﬁc spatial area, such as an urban region or portion thereof, amenable to planning.

Economics in time, space, and footprints Economic sustainability focuses on one portion of sustainability, for instance, one leg of a three-legged environment/social/economic stool (Barbier 1987, Campbell 1996, Perman et al. 2003, Rogers et al. 2006). This concept is quite different from sustained economic growth. Measures of economic sustainability have attracted particular attention (Pearce and Atkinson 1993, Pezzey et al. 2006). Also, sometimes sustainability economics is used to refer to ecological economics or environmental economics as described in the preceding section. Just as in those cases, a rich array of policies has been proposed based on sustainability (Howarth and Norgaard 1992, Pezzey 2004). Finally, urban sustainability has a nice ring, but realistically is an oxymoron. Energy efﬁciency in buildings, public transport, growing food in window boxes, recycling of materials, self reliance, and such proposals are usually listed to describe urban sustainability, and typically are all positive goals. Given a city’s huge concentration of people and massive inputs and outputs, the gain in energy, materials, food, etc. from such proposals is small or negligible. No pretense of a balance, where both people and nature thrive in a city, exists. People overwhelmingly dominate the area of a city or metropolitan area, and nature survives as shreds. However for a whole urban region, a nature-and-people balance is worth considering and evaluating (also see the ecological footprint section below, and especially Chapter 12, for alternative, more promising, ways to think about urban sustainability). Spatial arrangement

A bare introduction to this often overlooked, but potentially large topic in economics highlights two dimensions: (1) urban-region patterns and economics; and (2) economic disparities: poor and rich. Urban-region patterns and economics As mentioned earlier, economic models are largely non-spatial (Costanza 1991, Jones 2002). In addition to the spatially explicit dimensions of ecological economics, two exceptions are noteworthy for the urban region. Urban economics is a mixture of market and regulatory approaches focused on the city, and to a lesser extent, the metropolitan area. Economic geography, on the other hand, evolved with an early spatial foundation (Christaller 1933, Losch 1954). It has a much broader focus on the land, and integrates, e.g., agricultural, forested, and urbanized lands with transportation. Economic geography considers the form of cities and spatial arrangement of land uses. This approach, thus, is consistent with the combined growth, regulatory, and ecological economics approaches elucidated here for the urban region (Braat and Steetskamp 1991).

61

62

Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns Rural and urban interactions emphasize the importance of spatial pattern in an economic model (Hall 2002). Just as in development economics, they are another key to understanding urban region economics (Ray 1998). Two directional resource ﬂows characterize the rural and urban relationship (though, as noted in Chapter 1, the term rural does not ﬁt well in most urban regions). The traditional transfers are of rural agricultural products to the city, and of urban industrial and service products back to the rural area. In today’s urban region, resource transfers and people movements may be massive and spatially quite complex. Commuters jam highways and rail lines entering and leaving some cities, especially in industrialized nations. Air and water pollutants, diverse species, and much more move between rural and urban. Furthermore lateral movement and transfer is increasingly prevalent, especially around cities with external ring roads commonly present across Europe (Chapter 7). Therefore, in addition to agricultural economics, major transfers in the urban region emphasize transportation economics, solid-waste and sewage-treatment economics, public-health economics, and more. These movements and transfers bring land economics into focus (Cheshire 1988, Fainstein and Campbell 1996, Ray 1998). Some people own land and some rent. Land value helps determine ownership, as well as ongoing housing cost for both owners and renters. But land prices or value also affect the size of area owned, an indicator of the amount of agricultural and other products from the land, at least for production that is proportional to land area. Analogously, land prices help determine whether outward urbanization is compact development or sprawl on large house lots. In general, land value decreases with distance from city. However, the highly patchy pattern of diverse communities and greenspaces in the urban region creates a complex land-value patchwork, which is superimposed on the distancefrom-city gradient. In a rapidly growing region, land values rise markedly in anticipation of growth. Also, corruption may act to artiﬁcially inﬂate land prices. Usually the patchwork is highly dynamic with rapid land-price changes in patches around the region appearing in a seemingly uncoordinated manner. Zoning by government and the public puts some limits to uncontrolled development, but often becomes eroded in effectiveness over time. Municipalities in an urban region sometimes invest in transportation infrastructure to meet existing demand for resource or people transport (GomezIbanez 1999, Forman et al. 2003). Alternatively, transportation investment is designed to stimulate development opportunities, which, without serious planning and protection, often have major environmental degradation and economic effects. Municipalities or private interests also invest in industrial and commercial development, which normally provides a signiﬁcant boost in income to the

Economics in time, space, and footprints municipality. And they invest in residential development, which is considered to provide a modest income, though service costs may exceed income. Acquiring land for resource protection is just as sensitive to land value as are housing sales and ownership. Such land acquisition, as in the water supply case above, is difﬁcult and expensive in an area near a city or a community expected to expand outward. Accomplishing land protection early, well before growth is expected, is much less expensive. It requires thinking and investing in the future, just as the Jamaican family and Norwegian nation do. Economic disparities: poor and rich Land value highlights another large, difﬁcult economic issue. The beneﬁts of growth fall unequally, creating or exacerbating the economic disparities between the rich and poor (Main and Williams 1994, Fainstein and Campbell 1996, LeGates and Stout 2003, World Bank 2006). Poverty is present in all cities and, relative to the land as a whole, often concentrated there. Wealth is analogously present and concentrated. Neither wealth nor poverty is good for the environment. But the people and residences of the two groups are little mixed, indeed commonly quite segregated, and often separated by middle-income communities. Land values are stretched from high to low in nearby rich and poor neighborhoods, almost anywhere in and near cities. Market-driven investments in the neighborhoods tend to parallel the land values, helping to maintain both poor and rich areas. Consequently a patchwork of neighborhood land values is superimposed on the distance-from-city land value gradient. One additional force makes this economic disparity a mammoth urban problem: immigration. Some of the highest population growth rates anywhere result from immigrants from rural to urban that ‘‘overnight” create squatter settlements (shantytowns, informal housing, favelas) (Perlman 1976, Main and Williams 1994, State of the World’s Cities 2006). The people mainly arrive with no capital and do not pay for the land or its ongoing occupation, creating an externality cost for government and the city. Characteristically the arrivals are poor, unemployed, ill-prepared for urban life, and have little for shelter. Informal economic and social systems, mostly beyond the reach of economic institutions and government, control life in such communities. Government and NGOs sometimes help a bit with infrastructure or economic conditions. Since squatters illegally occupy a site, periodically the owner, whether government or private, expels them as land value changes. Thus many squatters move from location to location for various reasons, often in an outward direction from the city center. Such squatter settlements mainly appear in speciﬁc types of locations: steep slopes, ﬂood-prone areas, forgotten spaces around transportation corridors, and

63

64

Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns other spaces where normal land values are low and investments few. Often these are the disaster-prone areas affected by ﬂoods, earthquakes, and mudslides. They tend to be the worst for buildings and for constructing infrastructure, such as water supply and sewage treatment. In much of the world, squatter settlements on poor sites are an increasingly familiar sign of a rapidly growing urban region. A quite different economic, social, and environmental pattern occurs with sprawl (Chapter 1), an urbanization process producing low-building-density built areas, particularly characteristic in North America (Handy 1992, Jenks et al. 1996, Gordon and Richardson 1997, Bullard et al. 2000, Lopez 2003, Frumkin et al. 2004). Sprawl thrives on market economics with weak government controls, where people with ample capital can own large house lots and travel largely by vehicle. Sprawl correlates with population growth, though even no-growth areas often exhibit a net outward sprawl. The widespread nature of the process is illustrated regionally, where 95 % of the 74 Economic Areas in the US South are expected to experience some degree of sprawl, compared with 88 % of the 98 areas elsewhere in the USA (Burchell et al. 2005). Modeling various compact-growth scenarios as alternatives to sprawl can be done using important spatial attributes in urban regions, such as adding an urban growth boundary (Ozawa 2004) or channeling development to the only county with public services available. Such models (Jenks et al. 1996, Gordon and Richardson 1997) can also compare the potential costs associated with each growth scenario. Even forest fragmentation, e.g., as a result of sprawl, correlates with urbanization area and may be a useful economic indicator (Wickham et al. 2000). Ecological footprints

The ﬁnal economic perspective for urban regions indirectly integrates many of the preceding dimensions. Instead of using monetary value or calories (Odum 1973, Odum and Odum 1981) as the universal currency, it uses area, such as hectares or acres, as the universal currency to which ‘‘everything” can be converted. The ecological footprint is the effect or ‘‘load” imposed on the biosphere by a population or person (Wackernagel and Rees 1996, Rees 2003, Mayor Farguell et al. 2005, Luck et al. 2001). Commonly it is measured as the total area of productive land and water surface required to support the population. Consistent with ecological economics (Costanza 1991), the concept recognizes that: (1) irrespective of changes in trade and technology, humans remain tightly interlinked with natural systems, and the economic production and consumption process invariably uses an area of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems; and (2) biophysical measures, rather than monetary, more effectively express the relationship between humans and ecosystems on Earth (Costanza 2000, van

Economics in time, space, and footprints den Bergh and Verbruggen 1999, Lenzen and Murray 2001). Inverting the usual carrying-capacity question of how many people can live in a given area, ‘‘ecofootprinting” estimates how much area is needed to support a given population, irrespective of where it is. What are the ecological footprints of people in urban regions? The average citizen of Europe, North America, Australia, and Japan, the most intensely urban regions worldwide, requires 5--10 ha (12.5--25 acres) of productive land and water per capita to support his or her current lifestyle. Residents of the Canadian cities, Toronto and Vancouver, have 7.7 ha footprints on average (Rees 2003), and residents of the megacity London about 11 ha (28 acres). In striking contrast the residents of developing nations on average have a footprint of about 1.0 ha (2.5 acres). The population of each of the Canadian cities has a footprint about 300 times greater than the area of the metropolitan area. The much-larger London requires a total productive area, not only larger than its urban region, but equal to the total productive land area in Britain. These ecological footprints are based on the total equivalent productive area to provide the resource inputs to the city or person. However, as evident in the ecological economics discussion above, both incoming resources and outgoing effects on the environment are important. Thus, in an extensive study of the 29 largest European cities around the Baltic, the city-population footprints were 565--1130 times larger than the city areas (Rees 2003). That study added the area required for waste assimilation to the resource-consumption area. Urban sustainability, as outlined in the previous section, is not promising, because the human imprint, inputs, and outputs have normally overwhelmed natural systems in a city or metropolitan area. However, a different bigger perspective might provide a solution and also provide further insight into ecological footprints. Think of the primary inputs and outputs for a city. What areas or landscapes do they mainly come from and go to? If the group of landscapes, along with the city, were considered as a whole system, it could be planned and managed for a positive balance of both nature and people. That would be a sustainable system with the city a key part. As an example, suppose the bulk of a city’s food comes from a distant graingrowing area, a livestock area, and close-by market-gardening area. Much of the outside-manufactured products originate in a distant forested area and a mining--industrial area. Water supply mainly comes from a forested aquifer in the urban region. Also, most water pollutants and air pollutants end up in a large downwind lake, solid waste in a huge dumpsite, and recreation and its impacts in a nearby forested area. The city itself also provides industrial, commercial, and residential resources. So, to plan this city’s whole system for nature and people, or urban sustainability, requires planning and managing the city with its ten

65

66

Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns primary linkage areas. In this example, four of the outside linkage landscapes are distant and six are in the urban region. The approach also highlights a next spatially explicit step in footprint analysis. In public policy terms, ecological footprint analysis has mainly been used as shock treatment, to alert people to their consumption or over-consumption patterns in market-growth and other economies, and to highlight consumption disparities among different peoples and areas. It has provided an easily measurable quantitative method, which is useful to the public and somewhat rigorously conﬁrms generally familiar patterns. Making footprint analysis spatial within a city or culture or region (Costanza 2000, Luck et al. 2001) offers promise for policy recommendations. For example, comparing the footprint of suburban residents with and without transit-oriented development could help highlight the relative value of TOD. Comparing the conversion of a community from oilto coal-generated power, or vice versa, would be indicative. Multivariate comparisons of populations with different consumption habits and resource uses, analogous to public health studies, could lead to useful policy changes. Finally, through whichever economic lenses one looks, the urban region is a rapidly changing powerhouse tightly entwining the big population with the ﬁnite land around. In the face of rapid outward urbanization, natural-resource loss, and widespread environmental degradation, an altered economic approach appears to be important and available. Combining growth and regulatory economics with ecological economics for resources and the environment offers a promising approach. Spatial arrangement also appears to be central to economic solutions for natural systems and their uses in urban regions.

Social patterns While social and economic patterns broadly overlap, it is useful to separate the social dimensions, since they are also tightly linked to environmental patterns. For example, mudslide and ﬂood-prone areas in cities attract squatter settlements and limit the types of social interactions and the quality of life therein. An expanding residential neighborhood of large houses and house lots focused around schools and shopping malls effectively destroys a productive agricultural or large natural area. It also consumes a huge amount of energy, produces greenhouse gases accordingly, and degrades water bodies, aquatic ecosystems, and ﬁsh populations. Based on such examples, both poverty and wealth degrade nature, and therefore our future. Social patterns focus on groups of people, their interactions, and their spatial and organizational arrangements, obviously key factors in understanding urban regions and uses of natural systems. Also important from a different perspective

Social patterns are the core components of culture, such as aesthetics, traditions, morals, learning, and language. Social patterns and culture are the two themes introduced in this and the next section. Four somewhat dissimilar perspectives are used to explore social patterns relative to the topic of this book: (1) social linkages and spatial scale; (2) squatter settlements and the poor; (3) transportation in urbanization; and (4) land protection and social pattern. Social linkages and spatial scale Neighborhood, as a space of nearby residential buildings and people, and community, as a group of people with vibrant linkages, are useful place to begin considering social patterns and urban regions. What makes a neighborhood a community? People interacting and remaining in a neighborhood creates a community (Ravetz 2000, LeGates and Stout 2003, Forman et al. 2004, Handy 2005). For example, safe roads, sidewalks, paths/walkways/nature trails, bicycle routes, meeting places, playgrounds, ball ﬁelds, tiny parks, local-communityevent sites, and town conservation lands help create neighborhoods with actively interacting people. These are spatial objects available for planning and designing. A high frequency of local trips by residents walking or bicycling, rather than driving, catalyzes interactions and a community. Safe, attractive walkways are especially signiﬁcant as linkages. Appealing meeting places for children and neighbors are of paramount importance. Other types of neighborhoods can be described. In a broader perspective, a sense of place creates and maintains neighborhoods. Small parks and greenspaces help deﬁne the character of a place, which elicits human responses such as understanding, coherence, welcome, danger, or mystery (Jacobs 1992, Kaplan et al. 1998). Nature and the built environment combine as the central components of a place for people. At the urban-region scale we are all in a giant sandbox together. To establish and sustain the vibrant social linkages of a community, minimizing chaos and conﬂict is valuable. That requires collaboration of residents and at least some planning of space. The task is increasingly hard and urgent; so many people from afar keep entering the sandbox. Regional social groups and organizations and institutions usually exist, but mostly in a scattered, intermittent, and peripheral way. Regional cyclists recreate together on weekends and work to create a regional trail network. Analogous groups may exist for hiking, canoeing, off-road-vehicle riding, bird-watching, sailing, and so forth. Service organizations may have regional activities. Publichealth institutions may work regionally with the public. Solid-waste disposal and recycling efforts may link the public regionally. Some conservation organizations

67

68

Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns protect land around a region. Nevertheless, thinking about, working together, and planning an urban region is a challenge because social linkages are mainly at the scale of smaller units within the region. Squatter settlements and the poor In cities, social interactions within and among communities reﬂect the overall concentration of people plus the spatial arrangement of neighborhoods and other land uses (Fainstein and Campbell 1996, Bullard et al. 2000, Macionis and Parillo 2001, Hall 2002, Ozawa 2004). As indicated above, the economic and environmental implications of poverty are far-reaching, so we start with certain social dimensions of low-income (or slum) communities (Jacobs 1992, Main and Williams 1994, Vigier 1997, Hall 2002, State of the World’s Cities 2006). First it should be emphasized that stable poor communities are probably present in all cities. A sense of place is strong. Neighbors not only protect their place against internal degradation, but also against outside threats. Threats range from encroachment by politically more-powerful wealthy or middle-class communities to environmental justice issues such as building a noisy highway or a polluting factory nearby. Social linkages in such a community are kept vibrant and strong. Much more challenging are the squatter settlements, shantytowns, informal housing, and favelas born of unrelated immigrants from afar (Perlman 1976, Main and Williams 1994). Normally the sites are the environmentally worst in the area, such as steep mountain slopes (e.g., Caracas, Rio de Janeiro), nearby hillslopes (Tegucigalpa), oft-ﬂooded river ﬂoodplains (Bangkok), around railways and highways, and by polluted streams and drainage ditches where food can be grown. Greenspaces and water bodies are combed for food and other resources (Figure 3.2). Most informal communities are located close to potential jobs, such as by factories or to help serve nearby wealthy neighborhoods (Sao Paolo). Temporary squatter settlements also often appear just inside the edge of the metro area. Later, as land prices rise, they are replaced, while new squatters colonize the now-further-out metro area edge. Few informal communities appear much beyond the metropolitan area. Squatter settlements are widely plagued by poor water supply, no sewage treatment, no public transport, few public-health services, crime, little policing, undependable electricity, few jobs, uneven food supply, makeshift shelter, and a very high ground-ﬂoor population density. Yet in the face of adversity, people, even from far unrelated rural areas, may create vibrant communities. Probably all urbanists have seen this, but let me illustrate with my story. One glorious day, an ecologist in a motorboat took a colleague and me through the mangrove-swamp islets in the mouth of a river in Rio de Janeiro. We

Social patterns

Figure 3.2 Fishing for local resources in a polluted channel by an adjoining low-income neighborhood. Guatemala. Photo courtesy of Elizabeth and Bryant Harrell.

ﬁrst zipped along an attractive estuarine channel behind a barrier beach lined with ten-story hotels facing away to the sea. Behind each hotel, our view was highlighted by a large blackish 1.5 m-diameter concrete pipe ending right at the edge of our channel. Flushing a toilet in any hotel room efﬁciently sent blackwater rushing down and out. The aroma was strong, the estuary over-enriched. Soon we stopped on a nearby degraded mudﬂat, collected mangrove ‘‘seeds,” and stuck them in the mud a meter apart. This was at least a symbolic contribution to the ecologist’s impressive mangrove restoration project funded by the hotels. That introduction widened my thinking about urban pipe systems and water bodies, a useful lesson when later working on a plan for an urban region (Forman 2004a). More informative were the discoveries when slowly motoring among the mangrove islets. The place was ﬁlled with shantytown houses of discarded wood, plastic, tin, and anything else found in or near the river. Down the middle of wider channels were rows of crooked wooden poles and tree trunks holding a maze of drooping electric wires, which we were careful to avoid. The immigrant residents had created their own electric infrastructure. Occasionally we passed a small, ﬂat wooden boat with facing seats for four people which was poled or paddled past us. This was the ‘‘water bus,” the immigrants’ own transport

69

70

Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns system. Once we passed a higher spot with a tiny school, a playﬁeld, and a ‘‘water school-bus” with six seats. Children’s education was a priority for the squatters in this community. Finally, an amazing sight appeared on the main river channel, a line of perhaps a thousand large plastic soda-bottles strung together. From a point on the far shore the bottle line projected diagonally across and upriver, leaving only a narrow space for boats to get by. Day and night, month after month, the line of bottles caught other plastic bottles ﬂoating down the river, the discarded jetsam and ﬂotsam from upriver communities in the urban region. I could see two men at the far-shore point gathering in the valuable ﬂoating plastic bottles and tossing them into a truck. None would be wasted; urban resources provide jobs and income. Adversity, basic values, and ingenuity had created an active social community among apparently unrelated immigrants, right in Rio. Still, this site and others with informal communities are environmentally among the worst for buildings and human settlements (Perlman 1976, Main and Williams 1994, State of the World’s Cities 2006). Normally caring organizations and individuals, along with government agencies, attempt to provide limited social services to the people. Occasionally governments forcibly remove or try to eliminate such communities, sometimes with social or political repercussions. Occasionally better housing, or incentives for it, is created on a better site near jobs. However, pressure builds to recolonize the original difﬁcult site, unless a widely recognized and policed land use of value to society is established on the site. Especially in the rapidly growing cities of developing nations worldwide, informal communities are covering large areas. Effective answers remain elusive. Transportation in urbanization Outward urbanization responding to population growth and opportunity is the norm in history. The social implications of sprawl (Figure 3.3) have generated much discussion (Jenks et al. 1996, Gordon and Richardson 1997, Daniels 1999, Bullard et al. 2000, Benﬁeld et al. 2001, Getting to Smart Growth 2002, 2003, Frumkin et al. 2004, Burchell et al. 2005). Not knowing your neighbors, alienation, scarce meeting places, little walking, mostly vehicle driving, no place to play, inconvenient for the elderly, unsafe, no time to volunteer, and community organizations that wither, are familiar refrains for life in sprawl areas. A societal priority for planning and design that directly addresses sprawl and such issues remains embryonic, though global climate change might become a catalyst (McCarthy et al. 2001, Gore 2006). Several key dimensions of transportation, one piece of the big puzzle, are helpful here. Providing alternative modes of transportation, such as rail transit, buses, car driving, walking, bicycling, etc., is widely recognized as a key way

Social patterns

Figure 3.3 Residential developments relative to highway and informal walking paths. The highway and shallow ponds isolate and affect neighborhoods. Single-family homes on left are accessed by curved local streets and dead-end cul-de-sacs. Multi-unit housing at bottom has a small central common area and several informal walking paths radiating outward. Denver, USA. Photo courtesy of US Federal Highway Administration.

to provide ﬂexibility to those traveling, and to reduce clogged routes (Handy 1992, 2005, Warren 1998, Benﬁeld et al. 1999, Warner 2001, Forman et al. 2003, Ozawa 2004). If it takes half a day to drive across a megacity such as Sao Paulo, one may use an alternative transportation mode or simply not take the trip. A second approach, trafﬁc calming, provides a set of techniques to slow trafﬁc and improve the safety and quality of life within neighborhoods.

71

72

Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns Third, communities that have been bisected by a highway commonly have both reduced social interactions and greater environmental justice issues (Jacobs 1992). Creating walkways and bikeways under or over the bisecting highway can help mitigate the degradation and reestablish a sense of community. However, designing the structures to be well vegetated and wide for good lateral vision also facilitates crossing by wildlife, thus revitalizing surrounding animal populations and nature. A fourth approach, transit-oriented development (TOD), refers to urbanization centered around nodes with public transportation (Cervero 1993, 1998, Calthorpe 1993, Dittmar and Ohland 2004). Such development is typically moderate- to high-density mixed-use within an easy walk of a major transit stop. Mixed-use especially refers to residential and shopping areas in proximity, though industry and employment may also be included. Planners usually use 800 m (1/2 mile) as the radius for TOD. However, an easy walk also means a network of attractive safe paths or sidewalks, particularly radiating outward from the transit node (Handy 1992, 2005). Transit-oriented development should reduce vehicular travel somewhat and also enhance walking and shopping close to home. Those in turn should translate into greater social interactions and sense of community, compared with a sprawl area. Also, if a sense-of-place results from relating to and caring about the combination of nature and human structures somewhere, then generating a sense of place for people will doubtless depend on a serious protection of, and provision for, natural areas in a TOD nodal area. The San Diego trolley, Los Angeles commuter rail, and Portland (Oregon) light rail systems all have transit-oriented development around some stations along radial commuter routes (Cervero 1993, Ozawa 2004; Hollie M. Lund, 2006 website, www.csupomona.edu/-rwwillson/tod). In California, TOD residents have higher rates of transit use than people in adjacent areas, the city as a whole, and other cities and regions. Residents are about ﬁve times as likely to commute by transit as workers across the city. Transit-oriented development offers promise as an alternative to sprawl in urban regions, even though improvement in rates of local shopping trips, walking, environmental sensitivity, and social interactions remains unclear. Nevertheless, at this early stage, TOD, like ‘‘new urbanism,” is still focused on development. Pairing it effectively with natural systems is an obvious giant missing step in urban regions. Land protection and social pattern Finally, land protection bears highlighting as a social dimension in urban regions. The social interactions involved in the use of a common resource are highlighted in the so-called ‘‘tragedy of the commons,” where land owned in common is degraded by overuse. No-one feels responsible for it, and no

Culture cooperative planning and management develops (Hardin and Baden 1977, Botterton 2001). Government land intensively used by the public would have the same fate if government did not plan, manage, and police it. However, consider parcels of land protected for nature and natural-systemsrelated uses by individuals, conservation organizations, and government at many levels. When the land parcels are small, isolated, and close to a city, their future is in doubt, no matter what their legal status is. As the city grows and rolls outward these small isolated nature reserves and natural parks are under increasing threat, even if the local community remains strong. Under urban pressures, gradually many become, for example, ball ﬁelds, grass--tree--bench parks, infrastructure sites, or squatter settlements. If the protected areas are large, they tend to persist longer in a seminatural state, but still become eroded. The huge somewhat-natural Ajusco area next to Mexico City may support water supply, rich biodiversity, wood products, game, squatter settlements, weekend houses for the wealthy, illegal drug gangs, police, armed anti-government groups, and the military (Pezzoli 1998). Imagine the land-use conﬂicts. Other cities have close-by large natural areas, such as Barcelona’s Collserola and Brasilia’s two large adjacent parks, with their own issues, including encroachment (Acebillo and Folch 2000, Forman 2004a). The best most-sustainable natural areas around cities are probably those that clearly ﬁt into a larger context, which is widely understood by government and the public. Thus a parcel in the middle of a green wedge projecting into Stockholm or in London’s greenbelt or in a key greenway of Minneapolis/St. Paul’s (USA) greenway network is likely to long persist (Munton 1983, Parsons and Schuyler 2000, Hall 2002, Elmqvist et al. 2004). Widespread recognition that the broader greenspace pattern would be disrupted by the degradation or loss of an essential piece protects the site. Frederick Law Olmsted’s Emerald Necklace in Boston has been threatened by development countless times, seriously damaged in spots occasionally, and persists today because government and the public understand and cherish it as a connected system in their midst (Zaitzevsky 1982). A city is an aggregation of sometimes-mapped social neighborhoods, as in London, but it is also a social entity as a whole (Bartuska 1994, Warner 2001). In Boston, the valued Emerald Necklace is protected by social interactions and caring by both the local adjoining communities and the city as a whole.

Culture Culture has some advantages over economics and social patterns in planning urban regions. Economic conditions, like politics and government, may

73

74

Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns ﬂuctuate rapidly and widely. Social patterns may also ﬂuctuate widely, but usually somewhat more slowly, since social interactions provide a network for stability, helping a community more easily get past a difﬁcult time. Culture, normally, is still more stable, often gradually changing and adapting over generations (Forman 1995). Although sometimes broadly used to include social, economic, political and other dimensions, I use culture in its traditional core sense (Seddon 1997, Nassauer 1997, Buell 2005). Culture refers to the traditions, aestheics, arts, language, morals and learning of a group, that are passed through generations. Thus cultural cohesion is a bonding force, a long-term linking of people by common aesthetic, intellectual, and moral traditions. Culture provides stability. Culture may be rich in either rural or urban settings, but tends to be concentrated, organized, and institutionalized in many cities (LeGates and Stout 2003). Museums, art associations, universities, language schools, concert halls, theatres, mechanical/technical institutes, and major libraries are manifestations. Architecture, art, and music around a city provide daily reminders of culture. The urban region normally has considerable cultural diversity, the different cultures coexisting. Normally cultural groups are somewhat separate but spatially overlapping (Hall 2002, LeGates and Stout 2003). Where people are packed together, some conﬂicts are inevitable, though mutual respect for different cultures often makes things work, i.e., supports cultural diversity, in a region. A central value of cultural diversity is the richness of art, music, dance, celebrations, traditions, dress, language, and much more, provided for an urban region. These are deep enduring values which lend welcome and vitality and meaning to a place (Eaton 1997, Buell 2005, Nassauer 2005). Think of culturally diverse and vibrant Buenos Aires, Paris, New York, and San Francisco. Human culture relative to natural systems is now explored from three perspectives: (1) nature in culture; (2) biophilia and the building; and (3) urban agriculture. The third topic also helps to integrate economic dimensions, social patterns, and culture. Nature in culture Nature permeates and is of central importance in human culture, just as ecosystem services provide major economic values to society. Art, songs, celebrations, stories, and traditions are rife with nature. For some people, nature has a for-its-own-sake intrinsic value, irrespective of human attitudes. Thus we have no inherent right to destroy or degrade nature. Other people treasure the ‘‘existence value” of nature. I value the migrating herds of caribou in the arctic and the existence of aardvarks and tomb bats, even though I have never seen, and might never see, them in the wild. Still others gain inspiration from nature -- the

Culture reﬂection of a still pond and the ‘‘cathedral” of an Australian mountain-ash (Eucalyptus grandis) or Chilean monkey-puzzle (Auracaria) or US redwood forest. Aesthetics is another widely treasured cultural value of nature -- the beauty of a rich tropical rainforest edge or the glory of a single golden grass waving endlessly across a plain (Yaro et al. 1990, Nassauer 1997, Eaton 1997, Seddon 1997). Symbolism is especially valued by some cultures, such as the gnarled mountain pine in China and Japan and a ring of redwoods in California. Or a large nearby primeval forest may symbolize or represent danger and evil, thereby evoking fear. Even nature as a rich source of metaphors that enhance human understanding provides value to some. Two brief stories bring culture and nature alive. A shopping mall in Minneapolis/St. Paul (USA) was built on a former wetland and years later essentially went bankrupt, leaving inexpensive temporary stores mixed with broken-window spaces (Joan Nassauer, personal communication). Conservationists convinced the city to remove the mall and recreate a wetland there. An attractive trail with long curving walkway-bridge was designed to serve neighboring communities as well as a wider array of nature walkers and birdwatchers. One local recent-immigrant community was aghast. Not only were the convenient affordable stores being closed, a wetland was beginning to appear while the safe familiar parking lot was disappearing. A wetland, no less! Wetlands are sources of evil, places where bad things happen to people, as generations of children well know in that culture. The second story is of a forestry expert explaining how a local wooded area in a developing country could have triple the production and income from a gradual replanting with pine or eucalypt (Forman 1995). The village leader ponders the opportunity and invites the expert for a stroll through the woods. The host points out a tree that provides nuts in the dry season, a moist spot that protects their drinking water, a tree where he was married, a vine for the annual religious celebration, some unburnable trees protecting the woods on the windward side, some decrepit trees that provide ﬂutes for the children, and tall arching trees for reﬂection and inspiration. The forester is warmly thanked, and then returns home to look more thoughtfully at the conifer plantations near his own community. Nature is a centerpiece of culture and runs deeply in people. Being packed together in a city cannot extinguish that essence of humanity. Urban executives line their ofﬁces with stunning mountain scenes and seascapes which may have deep meaning to them. Urban immigrants may keep a treasured plant growing or talk about special places or show a faded photograph of relatives next to familiar trees and shrubs. Almost always these are from their home village or town, their roots. Nature is a central component of place, and of a sense of place.

75

76

Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns These values and patterns lead to two key spatial principles useful for planning. Nature attracts or repels, or is appreciated at a distance. And different cultures coexist somewhat separately in an urban region. A wise spatial arrangement of nature and people can sustain the diverse urban-region population. Biophilia and the building This book on urban regions only lightly touches ﬁne-scale patterns such as house lots and towns. Yet one very-ﬁne-scale pattern, the building, illustrates an especially important linkage between nature and culture. People in buildings can be effectively cut off from nature. Especially for people working day after day, or during long periods of recovery from illness, that disconnect appears to be signiﬁcant (Kellert and Wilson 1993, Kellert 2005). Research studies indicate that linkages with nature improve human health and recovery from illness, improve mental well-being and ‘‘quality of life,” enhance worker satisfaction and productivity, and reduce stress (Ulrich 1984, Orr 2002, Frumkin et al. 2004, Stephen Kellert, personal communication). These patterns seem to be associated with biophilia, the inherent human afﬁnity for nature, whereby people evolved with, fundamentally depend on, and are inspired by nature (Wilson 1984). All this has spawned biophilic design thinking (Kellert et al. 2007). Buildings not only can minimize adverse environmental and human health effects (e.g., the so-called LEED design approach in architecture), but equally important, buildings and landscapes foster human health, performance, and productivity by enhancing connections to the natural environment. Yet biophilic design is not simply anthropocentric. ‘‘Bringing buildings to life” offers signiﬁcant beneﬁt to nature itself. For example, structures can be designed to: provide habitat for targeted rare species; enhance surrounding natural systems; serve as stepping stones for species movement across a built area; attract a richness of ﬁne-scale nature or small species on the texture of building surfaces; and even educate people for nature protection elsewhere. Since buildings may exist by the hundreds of thousands or more in urban regions, the cumulative positive effect of biophilic design could be quite remarkable. Urban agriculture Urban agriculture refers to the growing of food in and close to cities, though commercial ﬂower growing is sometimes included in the concept (Ponting 1991, Smit and Nasr 1992, Jacobi et al. 2000). Urban agriculture may occur on any suitable site, including window boxes, balconies, rooftops, temporarily vacant spaces, community gardens (allotments) in designated public spaces, market-gardening areas (truck farms), remnant suburban or peri-urban

Culture farm ﬁelds, and ﬁelds unsuitable for building. Greenhouses of various sorts and indoor spaces for hydroponics and other high-technology biomass production are also used. Small spaces sometimes grow livestock, poultry, and other domestic animals, though normally land values are too high for animal production. Aquaculture is important in some urban regions (e.g., Calcutta/Kolkata, Bangkok) (Costa-Pierce et al. 2005). Family food growing is usually most successful close to one’s residence. However market-gardening (truck farming), i.e., intensive commercial vegetable-and-fruit production in an area of small ﬁelds close to a city, seems optimum to provide local food for city markets and restaurants. Unusual examples of market-gardening are an ‘‘agricultural park” next to Barcelona and locations in a greenbelt around London (Howe 2002, Forman 2004a). Several hundred million people apparently are involved in urban agriculture, with fresh vegetables being the most important product. In Antananarivo (Madagascar) and Bissau (Guinea-Bissau) 90 % of the city’s vegetables are grown in urban agriculture (Mougeot 2005). Soﬁa (Bulgaria) and Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) receive ≥80% of their milk, Hanoi 50% of its meat, and London 10% of its honey from urban agriculture. Mexico City, Moscow, English cities, Australian cities, Havana, Rosario (Argentina), Vancouver (Canada), and many other cities share in this self-made bounty (Losada et al. 1998, Howe 2002, Mougeot 2005, Houston 2005). With a ‘‘100 mile breakfast” campaign, Vancouver has farmers and consumers increasingly producing and buying local foods. Not surprisingly, worldwide, with food production some 5 to 15 times greater per unit area around cities than in rural areas, the number of farms and farmers as well as the value of products is increasing (Jacobi et al. 2000, Smit 2006). Historically food-growing was thoroughly integrated with communities and cities (Losada et al. 1998). But especially in some cultures, city planners and developers largely covered suitable small growing spaces with concrete and with imitations of nature in the form of city parks. In cities across the USA an average food item in a supermarket has traveled 2100 km (1300 miles) to be there (Smit and Nasr 1992). In contrast, for Accra (Ghana) government provides many incentives for local food growing, and 90% of the city’s vegetables consumed are local (Asoniani-Boateng 2002, Mougeot 2005). What are the goals and advantages of urban agriculture? (A) Economically, it: provides fresh food for markets, restaurants, and families; supplements income, especially for the poor; eliminates most transportation costs and associated road/vehicle/fuel use and pollution/greenhouse-gas emissions; and recycles organic wastes. (B) Socially, local food-growing: enhances interactions among neighbors; provides outdoor gardening opportunities for diverse social groups

77

78

Economic dimensions and socio-cultural patterns to work together toward a tangible constructive goal; and reduces hunger and malnutrition in poor areas. (C) Culturally, it: enhances aesthetics; discourages dumping debris on vacant spots; provides ﬂowers and other bits of nature to enrich living spaces; and teaches urban children about soil, plant growth, animals, natural pest controls (Mougeot 2005), and food. (D) Environmentally, urban agriculture: provides greenspace; reduces air temperature and pollutant buildup; absorbs rainwater that reduces ﬂooding and stormwater pollutant runoff; and recycles wastes such as garbage from food markets and restaurants to fertilize crop ﬁelds or to grow pigs. Problems with urban agriculture, of course, also exist. Pesticides and excess nitrogen fertilizer seep down and pollute the groundwater. Water used for irrigation may be rich in pathogenic bacteria from human wastewater. In dry climates much scarce water is used. Insect and other vectors carrying malaria, chagas disease, and many other public health menaces are enhanced, especially by poor-drainage water in tropical cities (Robinson 1996, Asomani-Boateng 2002, Asare Afrane et al. 2004; Burton Singer, personal communication). Plants grown on chemically polluted vacant lots or brownﬁeld areas may absorb high levels of heavy metals and other toxins (Kirkwood 2001, Berger 2006). Aquaculture normally produces prodigious amounts of food, yet, where human wastewater containing pathogenic bacteria is used to support the production, a cultural aversion to its use has to be balanced against the prevalence of poverty and food shortage (Costa-Pierce et al. 2005). Remnant farmland areas in suburban or peri-urban areas also provide many values to their communities (Forman et al. 2004). These include diverse farm products, and the potential for production on prime agricultural soils in the future. The historical symbolism of farmland in town, the active roles of farm families, the educational dimensions of farms, and the availability and convenience of fresh produce in town farm-stands are important values. Agricultural areas near roads, railroads, paths, and scenic points contribute signiﬁcantly to preserving the open and rural character of a town. They enhance game populations, and increase the town’s wildlife biodiversity by providing habitat for species requiring large open areas. Perhaps most important is the ethics of protecting prime food-producing areas in a world of extensive and growing hunger. Or maybe teaching children lies at the core of culture. Urban agriculture teaches where food comes from, how one’s own plants grow and change, what happens after ﬂowers open, where seeds are hiding, what grubs look like, how fast weeds grow, what pests appear, which ﬂowers will help control pests, what birds do in gardens, how nice soil is compared with dirt, and how slimy earthworms feel. Collective knowledge about food and nature is passed from generation to generation in urban gardens.

Culture Finally, following Chapter 1 on regions and land mosaics and Chapter 2 on planning land, this chapter on economic dimensions and social patterns completes the presentation of underlying principles and concepts focused on people. We now turn to Chapter 4 on natural systems and greenspaces, the ﬁnal essential foundation provided as a springboard to understand and plan urban regions from a natural systems and human-uses perspective.

79

4

Natural systems and greenspaces

Ask a child with paints to make a large picture of a city look ecological. Splotches of greenery will be added around the buildings, perhaps with some birds in spots. Similarly, have the child make a remote natural valley look lived in, and some charming awkward houses will be drawn in the picture, along with people and a street. Of course no one pretends that real ecology is represented in the ﬁrst image, or serious design and planning in the second image. Rather this is art, which sometimes even appears on huge highway billboards or the sides of trucks as green marketing. After introducing regions, land planning, and socioeconomic dimensions in previous chapters, we are now ready to focus on natural systems, especially ecology. This challenging central topic for understanding and planning urban regions is introduced along with greenspaces, where natural systems have the potential of thriving long term. Five major topics, which progressively build on each other, are presented: (1) ecosystem, community, and population ecology; (2) freshwater and marine coast ecology; (3) earth and soil; (4) microclimate and air pollutants; (5) greenspaces. Important themes and overlaps among the topics will become evident. The ﬁrst four, even the ﬁfth, are key foundations and motifs throughout the book. Natural systems are effectively a scientiﬁc way of saying nature (Chapter 1). Rather than presenting the science of natural systems in their separate disciplines of soil science, hydrology, meteorology/atmospheric science, ecology, etc., the salient principles are nicely integrated through the lens of ecology. Only major ecological principles of particular value in urban regions are introduced. In most cases an example illustrating the importance of a principle to society is given. No hot-off-the-press hypotheses appear. Rather, we focus on widely known much-tested principles and concepts that can be used with

80

Natural systems and greenspaces considerable conﬁdence in analysis and planning (Karr 2002). To understand their development, the underlying evidence and variability, other ecological principles, and fuller deﬁnitions of terms, see basic ecology texts such as by Barbour et al. (1987), Krebs (1994), Smith (1996), Morin (1999), Ricklefs and Miller (2000), Townsend et al. (2000), and Odum and Barrett (2005). To further sense the scientiﬁc questions, methods, analyses, results, discussion, and excitement of ecological discovery, peruse recent issues of journals such as Ecology, Ecosystem Ecology, Biological Conservation, Conservation Biology, Journal of Animal Ecology, Journal of Applied Ecology, Journal of Ecology, Landscape Ecology, Limnology and Oceanography, Oecologia, Oikos, and scattered articles in Nature and Science. To help understand why this particular set of natural systems principles is important, visualize the following distinctive characteristics of urban regions. Hardly any other place on Earth has these attributes. Furthermore, virtually all the ecological principles were developed from research mainly done elsewhere, so this chapter also emphasizes the applicability of ecological principles to these unusual urban places. Distinctive characteristics of urban regions include: (1) packed people, increasing in density toward the center of the region; (2) extensive impermeable surface also increasing toward the center; (3) large aggregations of rectangular residential lots; (4) major transportation routes, sometimes with strip development, radiating from the central portion, and at times jammed with commuters; (5) central heat-island effect; (6) agricultural and/or wooded land relatively continuous in the outer portion, fragmented in the middle, and nearly absent in the central portion; (7) many busy irregular ﬁne-scale road networks; (8) extensive areas with a diversity of prominent non-native species; (9) highly diverse air pollution in the central and downwind portion; (10) groundwater levels lowered and polluted in large areas; (11) extensive surfacewater pollution, commonly a mix of agricultural runoff, stormwater runoff, human wastewater efﬂuent, and industrial waste; (12) stream systems widely disrupted; and (13) wetlands extensively eliminated. Other distinctive characteristics of urban regions of course could be added, but these illustrate the kinds of issues that ecological principles will be called on to address for society. Before turning to ecosystem and population principles, a range of exceptionally important ecological principles at broader scales are brieﬂy mentioned. Most important are the landscape and regional ecology principles (Forman 1995, Burel and Baudry 1999, Farina 2005, Perlman and Milder 2005, Turner 2005, Odum and Barrett 2005). These were brieﬂy introduced in Chapter 1 and will be progressively described and widely used throughout this book on urban regions. Continental ecology and global ecology principles include a heterogeneous array related to paleoecology, biogeography, biomes/major vegetation types, winds and

81

82

Natural systems and greenspaces ocean currents, pollutant formation and transport, and long-distance migratory birds. Rather than including a separate section here, these principles are occasionally integrated into the upcoming section on ecosystem, community, and population ecology, as well as the following sections on water, air, and soil ecology.

Ecosystem, community, and population ecology The main focus is terrestrial, i.e., the ecological patterns and processes on land. Three broadly overlapping topics, progressively narrowing in scale, are introduced: (1) ecosystems; (2) natural communities; and (3) natural populations. Ecosystems

Local ecosystems, from natural to degraded, appear in aerial photos or satellite images as the basic spatial units of landscapes in an urban region (though the ecosystem concept can apply, e.g., from a tiny acorn to the globe). Energy flows one way through an ecosystem, that is, from sunlight to producer, through the food chain, and ends up as heat dissipated in the atmosphere. In contrast, materials and mineral nutrients either flow one way through or cycle within an ecosystem. Ecologists consider ecosystems to be basic units of ecology and of the Earth’s surface. An ecosystem is a space where species interact with the physical environment (Ricklefs and Miller 2000, Odum and Barrett 2005). A city pond, a meadow, and a patch of forest are ecosystems. Ecosystem structure refers to the distribution of energy, materials, and organisms, while ecosystem functioning refers to the ﬂows of energy and materials in food chains and cycles. The term materials (somewhat analogous to matter, elements, or biogeochemicals) is used as a contrast to energy, and primarily refers to water, mineral nutrients (chemical elements including nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, sulfur, calcium, zinc, etc. required by organisms), and chemical pollutants. Biomass is the amount of living tissue present, and is typically in ﬁve forms related by feeding or trophic levels: (1) producers, the green photosynthesizing plants; (2) herbivores, which eat plants; (3) predators, which consume herbivores; (4) top predators, which eat predators; and (5) decomposers, which break down and gain nutriment from dead tissue of all ﬁve groups. In an area of land the total biomass of the ﬁrst four feeding levels progressively decreases and is appropriately called a pyramid of biomass. For example in a large suburban park, the total biomass of producers (e.g., trees and shrubs) is typically huge, herbivore biomass (e.g., caterpillars, mice, and deer) moderate to small, predator biomass very small, and the total biomass of top predators (e.g., coyotes, large wildcats, eagles) is tiny (Figure 4.1).

Ecosystem, community, and population ecology

Figure 4.1 A keystone top predator, Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi). A globally threatened subspecies with fewer than 100 animals believed to exist; endemic to South Florida. Hollingsworth photo courtesy of US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Using light energy and chlorophyll, green plants photosynthesize, which effectively absorbs carbon dioxide and water to make carbohydrate and give off some oxygen. Thus plant cover, from green roofs to coastal marshes and farmland, helps somewhat in reducing greenhouse gases by absorbing CO2 , though forests and woodlands have the added advantage of holding the carbon for decades. The carbohydrate made by plants is the basis of biomass and these food chains. Although much variation exists, the food chain may have an energy efficiency of about 10 %. Each time biomass energy changes in form much heat is given off (as described by the second law of thermodynamics), and in this case about 90 % of the biomass energy in one level never makes it to the next level. The

83

84

Natural systems and greenspaces food chain or pyramid has several important implications in urban regions. First, rarely are there more than four or ﬁve trophic levels in any terrestrial ecosystem. Most animals, and normally most animal species, present are herbivores. Second, not much energy remains for top predators, which are often scarce. Third, biological magnification, the progressive increase and concentration of a particular material through the food chain, means that predators (and especially top predators) get a concentrated dose. If the material is toxic, predators and top predators therefore are impacted the worst. Some heavy metals and long-lived pesticides in urban regions biomagnify to toxic levels, just as some radioisotopes from the periodic ‘‘tiny” releases of radioactivity from nuclear power plants accumulate through the food chain to lethal levels in predators. A food web combines the food chains in an ecosystem and indicates where each species ﬁts, i.e., what it eats and who eats it (Morin 1999). That permits evaluation of the vulnerability of a species, as well as the stability of the ecosystem. A bird species that only eats seeds of one tree species disappears if the tree does not ﬂower or is killed by a pest, whereas a bird that feeds on three types of seeds may readily persist in a park. Food webs also often have many feeding links lower and fewer links higher in the web, which, overall, results in less stability for higher trophic levels. In view of the several preceding threats to predators and top predators, a ﬁnal principle is especially poignant and important. Some species at higher trophic levels are called keystone predators because they exert an inﬂuence or control (far in excess of their limited biomass or abundance) over many species lower in the food web, as well as the ecosystem as a whole (Figure 4.1). For example, in San Diego (California) parks, the keystone predator, coyote (Canis latrans), controls the populations of mid-size mammals (house cats, skunks, opossums) which feed on the young of, and tend to eliminate, many native bird and mammal species (Soule 1991). Thus the presence of the top predator, even at a low density, helps maintain a diverse native fauna and a stable natural community or ecosystem. The decomposers in the ecosystem primarily break down dead leaves and wood into mineral nutrients and heat. A whole decomposer or detritus food web operates in dead wood and particularly in the leaf litter and humus on the ground. The species include bacteria, fungi, and numerous types of tiny animals, which greatly affect urban soil conditions, from pH to water and humus availability. The urban heat-island effect, as well as global warming, accelerates decomposition, thus decreasing the leaf litter and humus cover that protects and enriches soil. The ﬁnal big subject of ecosystems is the material or mineral nutrient (biogeochemical) cycles, especially of sulfur, carbon, phosphorus, and nitrogen, all major

Ecosystem, community, and population ecology components of organisms (Barbour et al. 1987, Odum and Barrett 2005). The sulfur cycle effectively links fossil fuel, especially coal burning in factories and power facilities, to nearby high sulfur dioxide levels in the air that damage plant and human health. The associated acid precipitation acidiﬁes lakes, dissolves mortar and concrete, and degrades built structures, from gravestones and sculptures to large buildings across the region. The ‘‘atmosphere--organism” carbon cycle has rapid exchanges of CO2 between organisms and the air in ecosystems. Plants absorb CO2 from the air, and all organisms in the food web metabolize organic (carbon-containing) compounds in cellular respiration, which liberates CO2 back to the air. Carbon is stored in forest vegetation, cool soils, the sea, and the atmosphere. Carbon is stored long term in limestone as well as in gas--oil--coal deposits which are rapidly being combusted by concentrations of people in urban regions and elsewhere. This process increasingly pumps carbon, i.e., CO2 and CH4 (methane), into the atmosphere as greenhouse gas. Associated higher global temperature and sealevel rise promise big problems for many urban regions. In the ‘‘organism--soil” phosphorus cycle, phosphorus is absorbed by roots, moved through the food chain, and returned to the soil in decomposition. Rocks and ocean sediments are long-term storage reservoirs for phosphorus. The more complex ‘‘atmosphere--organism--soil” nitrogen cycle includes the basic phosphorus-type model. In addition though, a series of bacteria with specialized functions converts ammonia (NH4 ) to nitrite (NO2 ), nitrite to nitrate (NO3 ), nitrate to nitrogen gas (N2 ) in the air, and nitrogen gas to ammonia. Urban regions are bathed in nitrogen and phosphorus (Smith 1981, Gilbert 1991, Craul 1999, Nowak 1994, Santamouris 2001, Sieghardt et al. 2005). A concentration of high combustion engines used in transportation and industry covers the land with nitrogen oxides (NOX). These air pollutants are also major components of acid precipitation. Fertilizers rich in nitrogen and phosphorus are poured onto farmland that remains the matrix cover in most urban regions, so agricultural runoff into water bodies is rich in these mineral nutrients. Market-gardening areas near cities are typically nitrogen and phosphorus hotspots. Furthermore, human wastewater is rich in nitrogen and phosphorus, so downstream of sewage treatment plants and across residential areas with septic systems these mineral nutrients tend to be abundant. An excess of nitrogen or phosphorus causes eutrophication (algal blooms due to nutrient enrichment), so lakes, ponds, estuaries, bays, and near-shore sea areas tend to be unnaturally green. Recreational swimming areas are degraded. Recreational and commercial ﬁshing may be improved or worsened, but the species caught are different due to eutrophication. Heavily eutrophicated ponds and lakes may lose their oxygen, and consequently many ﬁsh and other species, at lower levels.

85

86

Natural systems and greenspaces

Natural communities

A natural community is the assemblage of interacting species in an ecosystem (Krebs 1994, Morin 1999). Communities dominated by different plant species are vegetation types (or ecosystem types), which are determined primarily by climatic and secondarily by soil conditions. Across the globe we recognize broad vegetation types or biomes, such as tundra, boreal forest (taiga), temperate deciduous forest, grassland, and tropical rain forest. Within each of these, vegetation types are often associated with microclimatic conditions and differ less dramatically, such as on the north vs. south sides of mountains and coastal vs. inland areas. Also soil conditions frequently differentiate ﬁne-scale vegetation differences, such as calcareous vegetation on limestone and acidity-dependent vegetation of a former peat bog. Mapping microclimatic variations and soil types within an urban greenspace is a key step in planning and designing for habitat heterogeneity or a diversity of vegetation types. Urban areas are extremely rich in vegetation or habitat types (Gilbert 1991, Sukopp et al. 1995, Godde et al. 1995, Wheater 1999, Boada and Capdevila 2000). One of the many ways to classify urban vegetation is a simple division into three groups (Hough 2004): (1) native plant community, such as remnant woods, dominated by native plants; (2) cultivated plant group, such as a garden area dominated by plants developed by horticulture for urban conditions; and (3) naturalized plant community, dominated by plants which acclimated or adapted to urban conditions without human action (e.g., breeding or planting). Many in the last group are from warmer climes or other countries, and are favoured by disturbance. Indeed the number of natural communities or vegetation types is an important component of nature’s richness (biodiversity), and is also a basis for the richness of experience available to the public. Vertical, horizontal, and species dimensions describe three types of community structure. Vertical community structure typically refers to the distribution or stratiﬁcation of layers of vegetation, which are primarily determined by light intensity. Consider a forest with canopy, subcanopy, understory, shrub, and herb layers. Each layer might receive about 10 % of the sunlight received by the layer above it, so plants of the herb or ground layer are adapted to thrive in very low light conditions. Animals in the forest have different food and cover requirements and are relatively different in each vertical layer. Also, dead wood in standing trunks and branches is a major habitat for many animal groups. In maintaining high faunal biodiversity, e.g., in a semi-natural park area, the number of vegetation layers is generally considered primary and the diversity of plants secondary. The relative loss of vertical community structure is a useful measure of habitat degradation.

Ecosystem, community, and population ecology

Figure 4.2 Herbivores in heavily browsed woods, white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginiana). Note exposed mineral soil with near-absence of leaf litter and humus cover. Michigan, USA. Photo courtesy of US Department of Agriculture.

Often one or two forest layers appear to be absent because of ﬁre, livestock grazing/browsing, overpopulation of a vertebrate herbivore, logging, or other human activity sometime in the past. Removal of a shrub layer, for example, by deer overbrowsing emphasizes that animals do not simply respond to vegetation, but affect and in some cases mold the vegetation form we see, especially at edges (Figure 4.2). The loss of a shrub layer is particularly signiﬁcant because it serves as cover for so many ground animals. Also it is a primary determinant of light, temperature, and moisture conditions on the soil, where concentrated seeds and invertebrates are often important food sources for animals. Urban park management may need to balance the value of vegetation cover and biodiversity against shrub-removal security concerns in spots. Horizontal community structure may be described as vegetation along a gradient or in patches. A gradient represents a species assemblage gradually, rather than abruptly, changing across an area, and is mostly limited to certain natural conditions such as in a tropical rain forest. However many ecological patterns, including lichen diversity, soil attributes, and rare species, have been analyzed

87

88

Natural systems and greenspaces along a generalized urban-to-rural gradient (McDonnell et al. 1997). Usually, however, rock, soil, and water conditions are patchy with fairly abrupt boundaries, so the vegetation is patchy with relatively distinct edges. Human activities normally accentuate the sharpness of edges. Indeed, in greenspaces, abrupt and relatively straight hard edges between vegetation types tend to be depauperate in species (Forman 1995, Fortin 1999). Soft edges may appear as a squeezed-together gradient, as a curvy or convoluted boundary, or as a narrow strip of ﬁne-scale patchiness or mosaic pattern. Soft edges, typically rich in biodiversity and much used by wildlife, offer many design opportunities in the urban region. The species structure of a community refers to the richness, relative abundance, and composition of species present (Morin 1999, Perlman and Milder 2005). Species richness, the number of species present, is the core of the biodiversity concept. Relative abundance ranges from strong dominance or abundance of a single species to a high degree of evenness, where several species are relatively abundant and no species dominates. Species composition refers to the particular species present, in contrast to their richness and relative abundance. While species richness is a key to biodiversity, a strong dominant species in a community may be quite natural, or may be eliminating other species and warrant evaluation for management. Species composition emphasizes that species are not created equal, but that certain species are rare, dominant, interior, keystone, non-native, pest, and so forth. Planning, designing, and managing greenspaces is not just about species richness, but especially about species composition (Zipperer and Foresman 1997). Diversifying street trees increases bird diversity, with avian richness and composition also depending on which tree species are used. Replacing native trees with non-native trees can be expected to decrease bird diversity. Also, communities change naturally in the process of ecological succession, a directional sequence of natural communities replacing one another over time. An abandoned ﬁeld that is progressively dominated by herbaceous plants, shrubs, small trees, and large trees illustrates a successional sequence in which the relative abundances of numerous species change over time. Plant and animal species may differ at each stage and gradually replace one another through various mechanisms. At some stage called an old-growth community, the large trees may become self-reproducing, so another stage does not replace them. However, individual trees or groups of trees die from time to time, e.g., from blowdowns and lightning strikes, and the resulting small space or gap is often ﬁlled by species of an earlier successional stage. This process of forming and ﬁlling holes in the vegetation is called gap dynamics, with large gaps, especially, mimicking the original abandoned-ﬁeld sequence. Protecting old-growth in an urban region is a high priority, because of its scarcity and the presence of old-growth-related rare species. Maintaining successional species, those characteristic of the early

Ecosystem, community, and population ecology and mid stages, is a well-known goal in management of certain natural vegetation. Retrogressive succession, where human effects progressively degrade natural vegetation is particularly prevalent in urban regions, and can be reversed by removing the cause and in some cases planting species of the next successional stage. For more than a decade ecologists have basically dropped ‘‘balance of nature” and equilibrium community from their vocabulary. Instead they emphasize the non-equilibrium nature of nature, since the scientiﬁc evidence overwhelmingly highlights change as the norm. Disturbance as something causing a rapid major change in the community may come from inside, e.g., a pest outbreak or ﬁre, or from outside, e.g., overhunting or tornado blowdown. Thus, like the gap dynamics at a ﬁne scale, disturbance-induced patch dynamics means that the vegetation at a broad scale resembles a mosaic of successional stages (Pickett and White 1985). Patch dynamics maintains high biodiversity. Indeed the prevention of disturbance, rather than disturbance itself, is the threat. Furthermore some disturbance-adapted species, such as ﬁre-adapted species, evolved with and essentially depend on periodic disturbance. Without disturbance these species are outcompeted and gradually disappear. Patch dynamics is particularly important in natural landscapes in the outer portion of urban regions. Natural populations

Forming the basic unit of a natural community, a population refers to all the individuals of a single species in an area (Smith 1996, Ricklefs and Miller 2000, Townsend et al. 2000). The pandas of a mountain range and ‘‘polkadot” palms of a large swamp are populations. Exponential growth refers to a population that increases in proportion to its size. Populations differ in their intrinsic genetically determined rate of growth, basically the difference between birth rate (natality) and death rate (mortality). Sex ratios and age structure (e.g., the proportion of pre-reproductive, reproductive, and post-reproductive individuals) are internal attributes affecting growth rate. Doubling time, how long it takes to double the population size, is often a useful integrator of these variables. External factors also affect population growth rate. The balance between immigration and emigration rates is important for some populations. Carrying capacity refers to the maximum number of individuals an area can support. As population size gradually approaches carrying capacity, environmental resistance becomes stronger and growth rate decreases, eventually reaching zero when population size reaches carrying capacity. Environmental resistance thus gradually changes the exponential J-shaped curve into an S-shaped curve. Environmental resistance includes weather and many human effects, as well as inherent density-dependent factors such as increased mortality and hormonal limitation on

89

90

Natural systems and greenspaces birth rate, which tend to regulate or dampen ﬂuctuations in population size. Sometimes a population like rabbits, deer, and kangaroos exceeds the carrying capacity, causing severe vegetation damage and soil erosion, so the population crashes and subsequently rebuilds slowly. An unusually high immigration rate or proportion of pre-reproductive individuals is an early indicator of a population that may overshoot the carrying capacity and damage the environment. Consider one large population of your favorite species in a large area; then consider four small populations on four separate patches with individuals never moving between patches (McCullough 1996, Hanski and Gilpin 1997). A metapopulation is the intermediate case: its individuals are distributed in separate patches, but organisms move from patch to patch. This pattern is particularly important in urban regions where the land is fragmented by highways and residential areas, which convert large natural populations into interacting small separate subpopulations. Small populations are more likely to disappear (go locally extinct) due to demographic ﬂuctuations and inbreeding genetic deﬁciencies. Metapopulation dynamics refers to the rate of loss and recolonization of subpopulations on the patches. Characteristics of the patches largely determine species loss, whereas characteristics of the matrix and corridors between patches largely determine species recolonization. Metapopulation formation, species loss from patches, and species recolonization are all readily affected by land-use pattern and planning. For example, maintaining at least one large patch is particularly effective at reducing metapopulation dynamics, because individuals are likely to continually disperse outward from it to the small patches. Natural selection is the genetically based change in a population over time, a process with four key components: (1) overpopulation (more individuals than can survive in the next generation); (2) variation (individuals that differ genetically and in their use of resources and environmental responses); (3) competition (individuals compete for limited resources); (4) and survival of the ﬁttest (the best adapted or most genetically ﬁt individuals survive and pass their genes to the next generation). So-called K-selected species have large individuals and reproduce slowly, whereas r-selected species have small individuals and reproduce rapidly. The former tend to dominate a site for a long time, while the latter rapidly colonize disturbed sites. Natural selection is a central process in evolution and in forming new species, including endemic species which only naturally exist in one area. The Capetown (South Africa), Perth (Australia), and Concepcion (Chile) areas are rich in endemic species. Adaptations are attributes genetically determined over generations that provide an advantage or increased ﬁtness to an individual or population. For instance, when industrial pollution blackened tree trunks in Britain, lightcolored pepper moths on the bark were increasingly visible and subject to bird

Ecosystem, community, and population ecology predators; the moth species adapted over generations and became darker and less visible. In contrast, acclimation (or acclimatization) is an adjustment of a single individual to gradually changing conditions. Also an animal may become habituated or accustomed to a continuous or frequent human activity so that the animal is no longer disturbed by the activity. Several other types of species are especially important in urban regions. Rare species have small populations, and are inherently in jeopardy near urbanization. Conservation biologists recognize different types of native rare species, some decreasing and some stable in population size. Non-native species (sometimes called exotic, introduced, alien, or non-indigenous species) originated elsewhere. Residential areas are major centers of non-native species for the urban-region ring. Invasive species are non-natives that successfully colonize and reproduce in a natural community. Naturalized species are effectively former invasives which have become well integrated into, rather than unnaturally dominant in, native food webs and ecosystems (Sorrie 2005, Muehlenbach 1979). Interior species live in a large patch only or mainly distant from its boundary. In contrast, edge species are only or mainly near the boundary of a patch of any size. Specialist species have a narrow genetic tolerance and are typically limited to a speciﬁc type of habitat. Generalist species, on the other hand, have a wide genetic tolerance and thrive in a variety of habitats and edge conditions. Keystone species have an inﬂuence on the natural community far in excess of their biomass or abundance, and may be of major importance for land-use planning (Figures 4.1 and 4.2). Finally, species of conservation importance is a general concept mostly referring to rare species or keystone species recognized to be of particular ecological or societal value in an area. An organism increases growth rate as resources increase, typically growing until a limiting resource is no longer sufﬁcient to permit further growth (Smith 1996, Ricklefs and Miller 2000, Townsend et al. 2000). Competition for limiting resources beneﬁts one species and inhibits the other. Environmental conditions, such as pH and temperature, inﬂuence an organism’s use of resources, but are not depleted by the process. Diffuse competition where a species competes with many species for many resources, each resource being a small portion of the total used, is widespread. Species coexistence in nature is also the norm, and largely results from: environmental heterogeneity, such as hiding places and varied-size food patches; the use of many rather than one resource; having different food preferences; and switching diets as food availability ﬂuctuates. Unlike competition between species at one trophic level, predators and prey represent two levels in the food chain (Morin 1999). Predators (including top predators) are animals that consume other organisms, while prey are organisms consumed by a predator. When prey density changes, the predator changes its rate of food consumption. Predator--prey cycles illustrate a negative feedback system,

91

92

Natural systems and greenspaces whereby one component stimulates a second which inhibits the ﬁrst, resulting in some stability for both components. In this case, more prey leads to more predators, which leads to fewer prey, which leads to fewer predators, which leads to more prey, which leads to more predators, and on and on. This predator--prey cycle does not produce constancy in either component, but rather each cycles up and down in numbers over time, and neither goes extinct. The persistence and regular cycling is a form of regulation or stability for both populations. Many other factors in an ecosystem affect predator and prey populations, so the relative importance of predator--prey cycles varies widely by species and location. Herbivores and plants are somewhat analogous to a predator--prey cycle. In addition natural selection plays a key role. Over many generations a plant species adapts to the chewing and sucking of herbivores by changing the chemistry of leaves and stems. Chemicals either unpalatable or toxic to the herbivore species, i.e., defensive chemicals, accumulate, which effectively protects the plants from being completely defoliated. Indeed leaf chemistry varies greatly from species to species. Tree species planted along streets help determine what and how many herbivore insects (and seed-eating birds) are present, and thus what and how many insect-eating birds are present. When periodic explosions of an insect population occur (Robinson 1996), certain plant species are extensively defoliated, while others with the appropriate chemical defenses are barely touched. Public health issues in urban regions often depend on the growth rate and dispersal of certain species vectors which rapidly spread disease. In medieval Europe, there were rats that carried the ﬂeas that carried the plague bacteria that killed the people walled up in cities. Urban wetlands and community gardens (allotments) in the tropics may support mosquito populations that carry malaria protozoa that kill people (e.g., Harare, Zimbabwe). Understanding life cycles of the different species, and especially the spatial patterns affecting dispersal or transmission rates, are keys to public health solutions. Finally, species movement from site to site by walking, ﬂying, water transport, or wind transport is a key ecological characteristic. It is usually difﬁcult for seedlings to grow to maturity close to their parent, and most plant dispersal is by seeds carried and dropped elsewhere by animals or wind. Many vertebrates have a territory around the den or nest that is defended, mainly against other individuals of the same species. The home range is a larger area used in daily movements, especially foraging for food. When young reach subadult stage, animal dispersal normally occurs, where the individual looks for a mate and establishes its own home range at some distance. Also, migration, a cyclic movement between locations, helps some animals avoid difﬁcult environmental conditions and access beneﬁcial conditions. Large semi-natural areas in an extensive built area tend to be valuable feeding and resting spots for migrating birds. However, home range

Freshwater and marine coast ecology foraging and animal dispersal are most important in urban-region planning, since these strongly depend on the sizes and arrangements of habitats.

Freshwater and marine coast ecology We now turn to diverse types of water bodies, their aquatic ecosystems, and their immediately surrounding land. The ﬁrst big topic, freshwater, includes hydrology, groundwater, wetlands, streams, rivers, lakes, and urban-region effects. The other complex topic, marine coasts, includes rocky shores, sandy beach strips, coastal wetlands, estuarine bays, various saltwater ecosystems, dynamic forces, and urban-region effects. Freshwater

The hydrologic cycle, describing the accumulations and ﬂows of water on Earth, is a simple way to begin (Ahrens 1991, Moran and Morgan 1994, Smith 1996, Wetzel 2001, Odum and Barrett 2005). Water accumulates as water vapor in the atmosphere, as liquid in waterbodies (i.e., groundwater, lakes, streams/rivers, and seas), and as ice in mountain and polar glaciers. Cooling the water vapor produces precipitation (rain and snow) which falls on land and water. Some rainwater soaks into the ground and some moves across the land in streams and rivers to the sea. Evapotranspiration from the land and plants, plus evaporation from water bodies, sends water vapor back to the atmosphere, completing the cycle. Deep groundwater is normally in an aquifer, i.e., a porous rock or sandy area full of water, suggestive of an underground lake (Gibert et al. 1994). Except in limestone areas, water at the upper surface of an aquifer moves very slowly, often only tens of meters or a few hundred meters a year, so pollutants reaching an aquifer tend to accumulate. Shallow groundwater within meters of the ground surface saturates earth and soil spaces, with the watertable being the top of the saturated zone. Shallow groundwater ﬂows through the ground into, and commonly helps maintain, surface water bodies such as streams and lakes. It also sustains plant roots and vegetation. Wetlands have water at or above the ground surface for prolonged periods most years, with marshes (dominated by herbaceous plants, such as grasses and sedges) having the longest inundation period, peatlands (often dominated by shrubs and peat moss) commonly intermediate, and swamps (dominated by trees) shorter inundation seasons (Salvesen 1994, Smith 1996, Keddy 2000, Mitsch and Gosselink 2000, Parsons et al. 2002). The seasonal rises and falls of water level, plus microhabitat heterogeneity, are important wetland characteristics. In most

93

94

Natural systems and greenspaces urban regions, wetlands have been mainly drained or ﬁlled, so the remaining ones are often centers of rare species. Lakes and ponds usually have sufﬁcient horizontal water ﬂow to remain oxygenated, and hence support ample populations of ﬁsh and other species (Wetzel and Likens 2000, Wetzel 2001, Kalff 2002). Internal habitat heterogeneity is especially important. Littoral zones, the shallow water edges of lakes, tend to support rooted vegetation and numerous microhabitats for a diverse fauna, from microorganisms to ﬁsh. Lakeshores with natural vegetation, which are often scarce in urban regions, provide valuable inputs and protection for aquatic ecosystems in small lakes and ponds. Lake bottoms are typically covered by ﬁne inorganic and organic sediments, which support bottom-dwelling animals. Water layers in the lake, largely characterized by temperature and oxygen differences, contain somewhat different ﬁsh and other species. Some lakes have anaerobic conditions, i.e., no oxygen, in the bottom layer permanently or seasonally. Ephemeral ponds (such as vernal pools) contain surface water for only a portion of the year, which essentially eliminates ﬁsh, but provides habitat for many unusual species of conservation importance (Colburn 2004). A stream/river system receives precipitation water from a drainage basin (catchment or watershed area) (Figure 4.3) (Decamps and Decamps 2001, Wetzel 2001, Kalff 2002, Wiens 2002). In streams and rivers, water velocity is a major determinant of both their habitat structure and aquatic ecosystems. In moist climates, streams and rivers are differentiated by a stream-order system. In this the smallest perennially ﬂowing streams, called ﬁrst-order streams, receive groundwater ﬂows, but only receive surfacewater in tiny intermittent (ephemeral) channels. Two ﬁrst-order streams combine to form a second-order stream, two secondorders combine to form a third-order stream, and so forth. Second- to about fourth-order streams typically are straight to somewhat curvy, ﬂow rather fast, slowly erode downward, maintain heterogeneous mainly rocky or sandy bottoms, and have narrow ﬂoodplains alongside. About ﬁfth-order-and-up rivers commonly are meandering or convoluted, ﬂow slowly, gradually accumulate sediment, have river bottoms predominantly of silt (relatively ﬁne material), and ﬂow through wide ﬂoodplains. The river continuum concept highlights the sequence from small ﬁrst-order stream to large river, with gradual changes in water velocity, inputs of important dead leaves, light availability, presence of rooted vegetation, ﬂoating-algae production, stream-bottom micro-heterogeneity, curvilinearity of streamsides, ﬁsh populations, and much more. Just above where rivers enter the sea, freshwater is ﬂowing downriver while tidal seawater pushes upriver, producing a freshwater tidal zone sometimes extending for several kilometers. This unusual habitat

Freshwater and marine coast ecology

Figure 4.3 Upper streams and lower river with associated wetlands. All three types of water bodies are typically connected to the underlying groundwater, and have quite different structure, functions, and protection requirements. The river has been straightened (channelized) and rocks line the riverbank. Also a bridge and nearby built structures have ﬁxed the channel in position, reducing its natural capacity to migrate back and forth in its ﬂoodplain. First- to fourth-order streams in the hills, recreation in a wetland and river ﬂoodplain, and agricultural runoff issues in cropﬁelds are illustrated. Adapted from Taco I. Matthews’ drawing (Forman 2004a).

supports many rare species of conservation importance, yet is often degraded by urban activities. These river patterns are modiﬁed by a cascade of typical urban-region attributes, including: widespread built areas; impermeable surfaces on slopes; high peak ﬂows from piped/channelized stormwater; extensive squeezing/straightening/piping of tributaries (and river); major infrastructure conduits along a river; small maintainance roads crisscrossing ﬂoodplains; elimination of most wetlands; limited natural vegetation remaining across the land; very little stream--corridor vegetation; lowered water tables; human wastewater, some or most untreated, from a concentrated population; numerous old and new industries; very high road density; huge trafﬁc ﬂows; and much more. These commonly result in: normal low-water ﬂows; periodic big ﬂoods with structural damage; waste removal and cleaner cities; heavily polluted downriver ﬂows;

95

96

Natural systems and greenspaces blockage of ﬁsh migration; and severely degraded aquatic ecosystems and ﬁsh populations. Yet urban rivers can be the people’s central focus and joy. Water pollutants cause physical changes (e.g., covering ﬁsh-spawning gravel beds with ﬁne sediment, or adding sun-heated roadside ditchwater to a cool stream); chemical changes (e.g., adding nitrogen and phosphorus from fertilizer runoff, organic matter from sewage efﬂuent, or toxic substances from an industry); and biological changes (e.g., an explosion of blue-green algae, loss of ﬁsh due to loss of oxygen, or disappearance of mussel populations due to sediment-laden muddy water). Urban regions are especially characterized by four types of water pollution: (1) agricultural runoff from the urban-region ring adds nitrogen and phosphorus from fertilizers plus sediment from surface erosion; (2) stormwater runoff from roads, buildings, and other surfaces carries hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides from vehicles, heavy metals from many sources, and an array of atmospheric pollutants that have settled on surfaces, only to be rain-washed into stormwater pipes and water bodies (it also picks up heat and dissolved chemicals from the surface materials themselves); (3) septic and sewage effluent, the former from dispersed residential locations and the latter from sewage treatment facilities, adds organic matter, nitrogen, and phosphorus to water bodies; (4) industrial wastes are extremely diverse and sometimes little known, but include inorganic materials such as heavy metals, plus numerous organic substances associated with the manufacture of plastics, paints, and other products common in markets, hardware stores, and automotive operations. Sediment runoff from cropﬁeld erosion and construction sites produces muddy water, smoothes the bottom (a loss of important microhabitats), and clogs up ﬁsh gills and other ﬁlter-feeding animals. Toxic substances kill aquatic organisms of many sorts. Organic matter from sewage and some industrial pollution causes an exponential growth of bacteria decomposing it, thus creating anaerobic conditions, which kill ﬁsh and other aquatic organisms. An excess of nitrogen or phosphorus normally produces eutrophication, a nutrient-enrichmentcaused explosion of algae near the surface, and sometimes anaerobic conditions lower down as bacteria decompose dead algal cells falling to the bottom. Continuous, relatively clean, water along a river system is important for passage of stream-to-sea-to-stream migratory fish, such as salmon and eels, a special challenge where the river passes a city. Urban-region streams are usually heavily impacted by the removal of woody riparian vegetation covering the ﬂoodplain, channel straightening (channelization), adding rocks or concrete along streamsides, and directing the stream into a large underground pipe. Water quantity or hydrology, rather than water quality, is the main issue for ﬂooding and low ﬂows. Impermeable surface cover in the drainage basin produces rapid and high water ﬂows (Arnold and Gibbons 1996,

Freshwater and marine coast ecology Spivey 2002, Forman et al. 2003, Jared 2004, Frazer 2005). Peak flow, the maximum height reached, is the primary determinant of ﬂood damage. Riparian vegetation, plus vegetation depressions and other stormwater detention basins, are primary solutions for reducing peak ﬂows. These solutions also permit more water to soak into the ground so streams do not dry out as readily in dry seasons. Stream corridors (blue-green ribbons) are often prominent in urban regions. Marine coasts

The abundance of cities on or near a coast means that extensive areas of coastline are within urban regions and subject to the manifold effects of concentrated people. Coastal areas themselves are as complex as the built areas, so identifying and addressing the key problems is not simple (Beatley et al. 1994, Smith 1996, Breen and Rigby 1996). Nevertheless, it is clear that coastal areas are especially rich in biodiversity. The combination of freshwater, brackish, and saltwater habitats, the highly heterogeneous coastline produced by gradual landsurface variations relative to water surface, the dynamic nature of the zone affected by daily winds, waves, and water ﬂows, plus extreme weather events, provides countless microhabitats for rare species and natural communities. Also coastlines are used by many migratory ﬁsh, turtles, and birds that move out to sea, up rivers, across the land, and along coastlines. Four major terrestrial coastline types are easily recognized. Rocky coastlines experience high wave energy, have a rather distinct elevational zonation of plants and animals, and often an abundance of tidepools full of rather unusual species. Second, sandy coastlines, including barrier islands, under natural conditions commonly have dunes, grass-covered areas, woody vegetation, lots of feeding shorebirds, sometimes nesting sea turtles, and high wave energy. But beaches are magnets for urban people, who largely eliminate the dunes, grass, woody cover, shorebirds, and nesting turtles. Linear hard structures such as jetties and walls are often built and rebuilt and rebuilt again after periodic big storms, and signiﬁcantly alter, not only the beach area, but also the marine area (Pilkey and Dixon 1996). Barrier beach islands, river deltas, lower ﬂoodplains of rivers, and other sandy areas near cities often experience saltwater intrusion, where seawater moves inland a distance, under surface freshwater. This results either from excessive pumping out of freshwater, or the upslope diversion of freshwater that would normally recharge the groundwater. Saltwater intrusion causes wells to produce undrinkable water. The third major coastline type, coastal wetlands, includes marshes (grassy), mangrove swamps in the tropics, and mudﬂats at the mouth of rivers. These wetlands have gradual elevational changes and gradual salinity changes from freshwater to brackish to saltwater. Also, daily, monthly, and storm tides repeatedly

97

98

Natural systems and greenspaces cover parts or all of these wetlands. Coastal wetlands, such as those formerly on the seaward side of New Orleans, are important wave energy absorbers against major storms (Farber 1987, Danielsen et al. 2005, Costanza et al. 2006). Yet coastal wetlands are particularly subject to loss in urban regions. The wetlands are drained and ﬁlled, sometimes extending the coastline outward to add highvalue city-center real estate for ofﬁces, condominiums, parks, and shipping docks (e.g., Boston; Chicago; Kagoshima, Japan). The fourth terrestrial coastline type, bays, coves, and harbors, are indentations along the seacoast with concentrated uses because of their relatively protected low-wave-energy condition. Docks, boat anchorages, and accompanying functions are located there. Several of the coastal land types are, in effect, estuaries, the coastal waterbodies and aquatic ecosystems where river freshwater carrying sediment and nutrients mixes with saltwater from the sea. Rivers commonly empty into estuarine bays, coves, and harbors, which are bordered by coastal wetlands. The combination of environmental resources makes an estuary exceptionally productive, so normally food chains are long, food webs complex, and ﬁsheries and shellﬁsheries quite productive. Furthermore, the rich resource base combined with considerable horizontal and vertical heterogeneity usually results in extremely high biodiversity in estuaries. Underwater habitats, including seagrass beds, coral reefs, submerged rocky areas, clear sandy areas, mud bottoms, and, in urban regions, plenty of sunken ships, boats, and debris used by ﬁsh, are equally diverse and important. Seagrass beds are rich areas for ﬁsh and are good indicators of unpolluted water. Coral reefs, among the Earth’s most species-rich habitats, also require clean water. Estuarine bays and coves support both dense and diverse ﬁsh and shellﬁsh populations, as do near-shore areas along the seacoast. These coastal areas are all highly dynamic. Storms on land produce ﬂoodwaters, and storms from the sea bring strong winds and large waves. Big storms such as hurricanes (cyclones) periodically occur, as well as tsunamis in some regions. Sand is eroded, transported, and deposited by sea currents along the coast (Pilkey and Dixon 1996). Groundwater and wind arrive from the land. Thus coasts are in the path of, and shaped by, these forces. Yet coastal areas are also highly resilient, returning quickly from a disturbance, though often in different form. Adding to the effect is gradual sea-level rise (Chapter 12). Many other urban effects on these coastal spatial patterns and processes are evident. A river passing a city receives masses of pollutants which form elongated plumes in coastal areas. Such pollutants may block light penetration, cause eutrophication, cover the bottom with sediment, damage tide pools, degrade estuarine shellﬁsh beds, and diminish near-shore sea ﬁsh populations. Sewage from the city may enter the coastal ecosystems, causing problems associated

Earth and soil with excessive organic matter and mineral nutrients. Major industrial centers with docks and shipping are usually present by coastal cities (Breen and Rigby 1996), resulting in highly polluted deep water that spreads by currents along the near-shore coast. The dispersed discarding of solid waste, or dumping in recognized locations, produces accumulations of debris on the sea bottom. Concentrated recreational boating and commercial ﬁsh/shellﬁsh boating widely distribute organic wastes in the water, and signiﬁcantly affect both ﬁsh and bird populations. Houses, condominiums, hotels, and other commercial structures often line the coasts of urban regions (e.g., Australia’s Gold Coast, Southern Spain, Miami Beach), especially sandy coastlines. A paucity of protected coastal strips plus masses of migratory beachgoers and boaters normally results in a coastline with but shreds of nature. It seems likely that intense human impacts expanding from cities along coastlines, which are among the world’s most ecologically valuable habitats, will continue, unless interrupted by rapid sea-level rise and more severe weather events associated with global climate change.

Earth and soil Two key ecological topics are introduced in the context of urban regions: (1) earth and soil in this section; and (2) microclimate and air pollutants in the following section. Earth (or earthen material), resulting from the breakdown of rock to smaller particles, provides many important functions in urban regions (Costa and Baker 1981, Gilbert 1991, Craul 1999, Bartels 2000). These include aquifer water supply, a stormwater drainage system, and a patchy deep structure underlying different soil types on the surface. Porous sand and gravel is extensively used as ﬁll around buildings and transportation infrastructure, so that water can readily drain through rather than accumulate in it. However, earthen ﬁll is inherently unstable on slopes, such as the downslope side of a highway where the surface of ﬁll is often highly erodible, and thus a sedimentation threat to a water body below (Lal 1994, Forman et al. 2003). Overall, however, erosion and sedimentation rates in commercial, public, and low-density residential areas are low (Craul 1999). Indeed downstream areas are often scoured out leaving streams short on sediment. Earth is easily moved, mixed, and smoothed, so all cities have important sand-and-gravel sources. Usually coastal plains, eskers, river ﬂoodplains, or more-expensive rock-crushing operations provide urban ﬁll. The proportions of sand (relatively coarse material of large particles), silt (intermediate-sized particles), and clay (ﬁne particles) determine the texture of

99

100

Natural systems and greenspaces earth or soil. For example, sandy soils have more porosity, better drainage, more oxygen, and less compaction susceptibility. In contrast, clay-dominated material tends to drain poorly, form surface puddles, erode, compact readily, and hold mineral nutrients better. Soil, on the other hand, as the upper portion of earth altered by organisms, is a rich dynamic mixture of mineral particles, water, air, roots, organic matter (blackish dead material), fungi, bacteria, and tiny soil animals. (This is not dirt which refers to unclean or ﬁlthy material). Soil types differ in organic matter, texture, chemistry, and other attributes, and are patchily distributed across the ground surface, as represented in soil maps. Vertically a typical soil proﬁle is usually composed of somewhat distinct soil horizons. The topsoil or A-horizon has an organic layer of leaf litter and humus over a layer of mineral particles and organic matter, that in turn is on a leached layer with most mineral nutrients washed out by percolating rainwater. Beneath the A-horizon layers is a subsoil or B-horizon and beneath it a C-horizon mainly of decomposed rock materials. Organic matter and available nutrients are scarce in these two horizons. Soil proﬁles and soil types partially reﬂect underlying rock types, but mainly reﬂect differences in climate and microclimate. Planners and designers have used soil maps showing the water-holding capacity (primarily determined by soil texture) of each soil type, together with the juxtaposition of types, to absorb stormwater and thus minimize ﬂooding in communities (Woodlands New Community 1973--74, Morgan and King 1987, Galatas 2004). Urban soils are signiﬁcantly modiﬁed by human activities, especially related to construction history (Craul 1999). Indeed, where impermeable surface cover due to roads, parking lots, and buildings is extensive, very little soil of any sort exists. Some urban parks have little or no natural soil remaining; New York’s 340 ha Central Park was entirely covered by 10 000 wagon-loads of sand from nearby Long Island (Phillip Craul, personal communication). Near metropolitan areas remnant woodland/forest is normally on poor agricultural soil and poor building sites, while farmland is on good agricultural soil. The preceding structural attributes of soils have major effects on tiny soil animals, water, and chemistry, which largely determine how soil works (Cothrel et al. 1997, Steinberg et al. 1997). Soil animals in proliﬁc numbers, such as earthworms, snails, slugs, and beetles, move up and down in the soil (except where it is highly acid). This increases porosity, drainage, and oxygen conditions, and mixes organic matter and mineral nutrients, all of which generally beneﬁt plant growth. On the other hand, high soil temperature from the urban heat-island effect accelerates decomposition and disappearance of soil organic matter and physiologically stresses plants.

Earth and soil Silt-dominated soils and loamy soils (with a fairly even mixture of sand, silt, and clay) are particularly good for growing crops and other plants. This is because excess water tends to drain away, the soil holds adequate water for plant growth (except in droughts when wilting occurs), oxygen reaches relatively far down, and soil particles (especially the ﬁne clay particles present) hold ample mineral nutrients to support plant growth. Loamy and silt soils are also best for septic systems in residential areas, because water neither puddles nor ﬂows too rapidly to a water body. Also, oxygen helps in decomposition of the organic matter, and the wastewater mineral nutrients may be held in the soil and absorbed by roots. Soil acidity (pH) is strongly affected by rock type, yet rainwater running over the widespread mortar and concrete surfaces in built areas typically makes urban soils less acid (higher pH), which affects the plant species that can thrive. Soil acidity affects mineral nutrient availability and root absorption. Not surprisingly urban soil chemistry is extremely diverse and particularly important from mineral nutrient and pollutant perspectives (Sieghardt 2005). Mineral nutrients such as nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur, calcium, magnesium, potassium, iron, and so forth are required in modest amounts for plant growth. If in short supply, nitrogen--phosphorus--potassium (N--P--K) fertilizer is typically added. Some elements, such as heavy metals, zinc, cadmium, nickel, and copper, are required by plants in tiny or trace amounts. However, at high concentrations, resulting from pollution, these trace metals or elements are often toxic (Sieghardt 2005). Also, many polluting organic substances, e.g., from the plastics, paint, and automotive industries, are directly toxic to plants, soil animals, and microorganisms in soil. Hydrocarbons, particularly from fuel combustion and vehicle use, tend to coat urban soils, creating a ‘‘hydrophobic” ﬁlm or crust (Gingrich and Diamond 2001). In consequence, water from light rains does not readily soak into the soil and root area, but remains on the surface and is evaporated. Nitrogen oxides (NOX) from vehicles and machinery also coat the soil, which often results in one or two plant species becoming dominant, and many others therefore becoming scarce or absent (effectively a terrestrial eutrophication process). Several other attributes of urban soils are rather distinctive (Craul 1999). The horizontal and vertical variability is typically greater, patchier, at a ﬁner scale, and different than in rural areas. Fallen leaves may be removed from under the scarce vegetation, so the organic matter that holds mineral nutrients and facilitates root growth tends to be limited in urban areas. Human materials and contaminants -- metals, plastics, glass, asphalt, masonry, pesticides, road salt, and much more -- are patchily distributed, break down slowly if at all, and leave

101

102

Natural systems and greenspaces accumulations of many pollutants and toxins in the soil. Also residential septic systems and cesspools add concentrated water, organic matter, and nutrients in spots. Digging down to see an urban soil proﬁle often reveals layers of sand or rubble (e.g., pieces of bricks, mortar, concrete) with sharp boundaries, sometimes with a buried layer of mixed organic matter and mineral particles, which reﬂect the history of building activities on the site. The sand and rubble layers are porous, and the layers with mortar or concrete have a high pH. Soil compaction and associated poor plant growth is widespread in urban areas, from the 50--100 cm thick compacted material under ballﬁelds to regularly walked trails. Construction equipment often signiﬁcantly compacts the subsoil, so when a site is later covered with topsoil, water cannot drain well and accumulates in the topsoil inhibiting plant growth. Even soil compaction due to vibrations from nearby vehicle trafﬁc, trains, and diverse equipment is signiﬁcant and widespread in urban regions. Overall, in metropolitan areas the history of human construction is a major determinant of soil conditions. In the urban-region ring, agricultural and other land-use history plus geographic/topographic location are progressively more important determinants of soil conditions.

Microclimate and air pollutants Microclimate and air pollution, the two subjects introduced here, are of major ecological importance in urban regions (Landsberg 1981, Oke 1987, Ahrens 1991, Schmandt and Clarkson 1992, Moran and Morgan 1994, Forman 1995, Smith 1996, Santamouris 2001, Arnﬁeld 2003). Microclimate, the history of weather conditions in small spaces, differs on north vs. south slopes, upslope vs. downslope, near vs. far from a coast or other water body, and on different sides of buildings. Wind, solar angle, and source of water vapor are the major reasons. Solar radiation composed of short wavelengths (the visible spectrum) and long wavelengths (infrared radiation) is absorbed by soil, vegetation, and especially dark impermeable surfaces, which then reradiate energy to the sky (especially at night) in the form of infrared radiation. Infrared radiation is effectively heat, so the air is heated. The abundance of dark impermeable surfaces around cities helps produce a urban heat-island effect (Landsberg 1981, Moran and Morgan 1994, Arnﬁeld 2003, Hough 2004). Upward-moving city air at night carries pollutants out and draws in air from the surroundings. However, if a temperature inversion (a warm air layer, e.g., over the metro area) forms, the air is blocked from moving upward, so heat, particles, and gaseous pollutants in the air accumulate.

Microclimate and air pollutants For an environmental condition such as temperature, an individual organism has a somewhat narrow optimum range in which it can survive, grow, and reproduce (Barbour et al. 1987, Gilbert 1991, Odum and Barrett 2005). Above and below that optimum the individual grows, but does not successfully reproduce. Above and below the growth ranges the organism survives, and beyond the survival ranges the organism dies. High temperature, for example associated with the heat-island effect or global climate change, increases an organism’s metabolic rate which in turn may exceed the organism’s ability to get resources. High temperature also accelerates development, such as leaf-bud opening and ﬂowering, which consequently may be damaged by spring frosts. Still higher temperatures desiccate plants, and ultimately inactivate enzymes causing death. Species composition changes with higher temperature, so, for example, on bird feeders in residential areas, cool-region species are gradually replaced by warm-region species. Higher temperature may lead to more air pollution and more severe effects on organisms. A major way to reduce air temperature is to maintain or restore vegetation cover, particularly of trees (Zipperer and Foresman 1997). Trees provide cool shade and also pump considerable water to the air in evapotranspiration, a process that cools the surrounding air. For example, in Berlin, a small greenspace of about 5--30 ha (12--75 acre) may cool the air 0.5-- 2 ◦ C (1--4 ◦ F), a medium 30--300 ha greenspace some 2--3.5 ◦ C and a large >300 ha (750 acre) greenspace may reduce summer air temperature 3.5--5.5 ◦ C (6--10 ◦ F) (von Stulpnagel et al. 1990). Also a large greenspace such as Tiergarten in Berlin, Mont Royal in Montreal, or Golden Gate Park in San Francisco, cools summer temperatures in the city for several hundred meters or over a kilometer downwind (Schmid 1975, von Stulpnagel et al. 1990). The coastal effect of a major water body such as a large lake or the sea, often cools air temperature inland for several kilometers in spring and early summer, and similarly warms the air in autumn. The coastal effect also increases relative humidity and fog or cloud conditions. Air-borne particles (particulate matter) in urban regions typically serve as condensation nuclei around which water droplets form, producing aerosols. When cooled, rain falls so that cities and areas downwind of cities often have somewhat elevated rainfall amounts. So, while high temperature tends to desiccate, greenspaces, street trees, green roofs, and other urban vegetation help to maintain moist air. Wind, another major urban microclimatic factor, comes in three forms (Brandle et al. 1988, Forman 1995, Arnﬁeld 2003). Streamline airflow occurs in parallel layers over relatively smooth surfaces such as large ﬁelds and smooth rounded hills. Turbulence, composed of eddies with (usually) up-and-down air

103

104

Natural systems and greenspaces movements, forms where streamline airﬂow is disrupted by abrupt boundaries, such as buildings and cliffs. Vortices are strong helical winds with a vertical axis. Particles are lifted off surfaces to become air-borne, most by vortices, much by turbulence, and least by streamlines. Streamline airﬂow is common in cropland areas of the urban-region ring. However, turbulent airﬂows generally predominate around urban areas where the upper surfaces of buildings and vegetation are so uneven in height. Turbulence not only lifts particulate matter into the air, it increases heat loss and desiccates plants, so many species in natural areas are at a competitive disadvantage in turbulent wind conditions. On windless nights in hilly or mountainous urban regions, cool air drainage, the downslope ﬂow of cool air, pushes a city’s warm air and pollutants upward and out. This serves as a free cleaning and ventilation system (e.g., Stuttgart, Germany; Spirn 1984, Christina von Haaren, personal communication). The primary requirement is to keep nearby hillslopes in unbuilt condition, preferably wooded (Gross 2002) and secondarily to keep high-rise buildings out of the main valley-bottom air-drainage channels. Noise is a particular issue in urban areas where it affects people and animals (Forman et al. 2003, Miller 2005). At modest noise levels, some species and people become habituated (accustomed) to noise so that it no longer disturbs them. However, trafﬁc noise from roads and highways with more than about 10 000 vehicles passing per day appears to signiﬁcantly degrade bird communities nearby, with the width of the degradation zone increasing with trafﬁc volume (Reijnen et al. 1995, 1996, Forman et al. 2002). In addition to trafﬁc volume and distance from road, the proportion of truck trafﬁc is signiﬁcant in determining noise levels. Not surprisingly, busy commuter rail lines also have signiﬁcant, though less-known, ecological effects. Also artiﬁcial night lighting has a range of ecological effects around cities (Rich and Longcore 2006). Several types of air pollutants are of major ecological importance in urban regions, and also cause human health problems (Smith 1981, Gilbert 1991, Craul 1999, Nowak 1994, Santamouris 2001, Forman et al. 2003): (1) (2) (3) (4)

Ozone (O3 ), which forms photochemical smog (by combining with other chemicals in sunlight); both can damage many plants). Hydrocarbons, which are liberated in fossil fuel combustion often cover and alter soils, and are also part of photochemical smog. Carbon monoxide (CO), which presumably can kill animals in local spots. Carbon dioxide (CO2 ) and methane (CH4 ), which are global greenhouse gases leading to higher temperature, sea-level rise, and more extreme weather events.

Greenspaces (5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

Sulfur oxides (SOX), which are especially produced by fossil-fuel burning industries and power plants, have signiﬁcant local effects on some plant species, cause acid precipitation that acidiﬁes certain water bodies, and forms particles/aerosols in the upper atmosphere. Nitrogen oxides (NOX), which are produced by vehicles and other highcompression engines, cause acid precipitation that acidiﬁes certain water bodies, blanket the region with nitrogen (noticeably changing plant species dominance in water, on land, and by highways), and forms particles/aerosols in the upper atmosphere. Heavy metals (e.g., zinc, cadmium, copper, nickel), which originate from wear and chemical breakdown of surfaces such as in vehicles, bridges, and machinery, inhibit various metabolic processes and therefore at sufﬁcient levels are toxic to numerous organisms. Particulate matter (particles), originating from fuel combustion, vehicle and machinery wear, road dust and wear, ﬁre, and wind erosion from cropland and construction sites. Particulate matter is commonly classiﬁed as PM10 (small particles) or PM2.5 (very small particles), with the latter being especially damaging to lung health of people and presumably wildlife. Particulate matter and aerosols (particles or gases combined with water droplets) also reduce incoming solar radiation.

Species, of course, respond differently to different pollutants (Smith 1981). Thus for ozone, pine (Pinus) and sycamore (Platanus) are very sensitive, but maple (Acer) and ﬁr (Abies) are not. Yet for sulfur dioxide, pine and elm (Ulmus) are very sensitive, while maple and sycamore are not. Since air pollutants blanket an urban region, varying from place-to-place in type and concentration, the distribution of urban plants and vegetation is signiﬁcantly molded by air pollution.

Greenspaces Greenspaces, as unbuilt areas in an urban region, contain and may sustain natural systems where ecological patterns, processes, and changes are in most-natural or least-degraded condition. Yet greenspaces, like built areas, are exceedingly diverse and signiﬁcant to society. Therefore this section highlights important greenspace types and illustrates key functions and ecosystem services provided for the beneﬁt of society. A greenspace may be covered by a single natural system or by many, such as evergreen forest, deciduous woodland, shrubby hilltop, rock outcrop, meadow, hedgerow, aquifer, pond, stream, wetland, vernal pool, and soil. Periodically the

105

106

Natural systems and greenspaces central ecological and natural-systems values elucidated will be supplemented by pointing out other issues, such as economics, social meeting places, aesthetics, and public health. A glimpse of the urban region as a whole is useful before focusing in on speciﬁc greenspace types. Many ecological patterns and processes have been compared between urban and rural or suburban areas (Gilbert 1991, Bird et al. 1996). Added insight is often gained by analyzing urban-to-rural gradients, from city center to the outer urban-region ring dominated by natural vegetation and/or agriculture. For example, studies of over 200 urban areas show that lichens decrease sharply from rural to urban sites, presumably largely due to the combination of desiccation and air pollution (Schmid 1975, Gilbert 1991). Spatial patterns and plant species change along the gradient (Steinberg et al. 1997, Williams et al. 2005, Hahs and McDonnell 2007). Soil characteristics such as hydrophobic conditions, fungi, heavy metals, organic matter, and mineral nutrients also change markedly from rural to urban greenspaces (McDonnell et al. 1997, Pouyat et al. 1997). The presence of rare species and many wildlife characteristics also sharply decrease along this gradient (Gilbert 1991, Bird et al. 1996, van der Ree and McCarthy 2005). The number of native species decreases, but the number of non-native species often increases more, so semi-natural city-center sites may have the greatest number of total species (Kowarik and Langer 2005). Landscape ecology patterns also change along an urban-to-rural gradient (Luck and Wu 2002, McGarigal and Cushman 2005). Discontinuities in response curves may be expected along urban-to-rural gradients, such as a drop in temperature at the metro-area border (Spirn 1984). Ecological measurements along numerous radii of an urban region might be expected to have the highest variability in the vicinity of the metro-area border or inner urban-region ring. In Northern and Central Europe, plant species richness has been correlated with a city’s area and population (Klotz 1990). Species number increased steeply up to a city of about 130 km2 and 100 000 inhabitants. Plant species number remained essentially constant from about 130 to 420 km2 (50 to 160 mi2 ) and population 100 000 to 1 300 000, beyond which the curves noticeably rose. The smallest cities measured (Ballensted and Schmalkalden, Germany), both in area and population (1.5 and 2.5 km2 ; 10 000 and 17 000 inhabitants), had about 350 plant species and the largest city, West Berlin (481 km2 ; 1 900 000 inhabitants), had approximately 1400 species. Where would you go in your city to ﬁnd the lowest, and highest, species richness? Ignore the zoo. In Dusseldorf, Germany, ﬁve groups of species (plants, butterﬂies, grasshoppers, landsnails, and woodlice) were measured in 38 habitat types (Godde et al. 1995). Overall, six habitat types had the fewest species, though considerable variation from group to group existed (in order, beginning with

Greenspaces fewest species): sealed (asphalt) parking place; parking places (lot); river bank; intensive grassland (mowed); market garden; and avenue. The highest species richness for these groups was found in the following six habitats (in order, beginning with most species): wasteland; swamp woodland; moist meadow; gravel pit; parkland; and railway site. Thus, in general, the most species-impoverished locations are the most intensively designed, built, and managed, whereas several of the richest biodiversity sites are the least designed, least managed, and most overlooked locations in a city. A still-broader view of greenspaces recognizes patterns in three somewhatdistinct major areas of an urban region (Table 4.1) (Spirn 1984, Gilbert 1991, Godde et al. 1995, Lynch and Hack 1996, Houck and Cody 2000, Lagro 2001, Ishikawa 2001, Greenberg 2002, Hough 2004, Wein 2006). First, the city and metropolitan area are primarily characterized by a broad-scale pattern of large greenspaces, within which a ﬁne-scale pattern of small greenspaces is nestled. Distinct corridors and patches dominate both spatial scales. Second, the metro-area border and inner urban-region ring have an exceedingly complex greenspace pattern, created by wide and medium-width corridors combined with large and medium-size patches. Finally, the outer urban-region ring manifests a broad-scale pattern of large greenspaces composed of corridors, networks, patches, and matrix, enhanced by a ﬁne-scale pattern of small corridors, networks, and patches. The 75 greenspace types recognized are familiar in cities worldwide (Table 4.1). In a few cases the same names appear in different areas where they appear and function quite differently. Numerous other less-common greenspace types could be listed (Chapter 5), including central-city palace grounds (Tokyo), lava bed (Portland, USA), barrier across river (London), large mine-waste areas (Johannesburg), and cave sites (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia) that are rarely present in cities. Instead of attempting to list the ecological functions and values to society of all these greenspace types, representative functions and values for planning are selected. Although these generic patterns apply widely, each greenspace in each urban region also has distinctive functions and values which can and should be delineated in planning. Furthermore, an array of spatially separate or connected greenspaces is always present that functions as a system connected by ﬂows and movements. Consequently both the individual greenspace and the broader system are important to planning and society. Greenspace functions and values are illustrated for the three portions of an urban region: (1) city and metropolitan area; (2) metro-area border and inner urban-region ring; and (3) outer urbanregion ring. For each portion, broad-scale patterns are introduced and then ﬁnescale patterns.

107

108

Natural systems and greenspaces Table 4.1 Greenspaces forming broad- and fine-scale patterns in three major portions of an urban region City and Metropolitan Area

Broad-scale pattern of large greenspaces Corridors: (a) river corridor with ﬂoodplain; (b) highway corridor; (c) railway corridor; (d) coastline; (e) steep slope Patches: (a) large urban wood-lawn park; (b) large semi-natural park; (c) lower ﬂoodplain/ delta area; (d) railway yard; (e) zoo

Fine-scale pattern of small greenspaces Corridors: (a) tree line; (b) shrub line; (c) row of greenspace stepping stones Patches: (a) small urban wood-lawn park; (b) small semi-natural area; (c) historic/cultural site; (d) vacant lot; (e) school yard; (f) cemetery; (g) street-side planted spot; (h) green roof Metro-area Border and Inner Urban-region Ring

Corridors Wide: (a) greenbelt (or urban growth boundary); (b) ring of large parks; (c) greenway; (d) green wedge Medium to wide: (a) stream or canal corridor; (b) pipeline corridor; (c) electric powerline corridor; (d) roadside; (e) tree/shrub line; (f) row of greenspace stepping stones; (g) string of pearls

Patches Large to medium: (a) heterogeneous suburban park; (b) large natural or semi-natural area; (c) golf course; (d) botanical garden; (e) market-gardening (truck-farming) area; (f) nursery-plants area; (g) lake; (h) wetland; (i) ofﬁce-park area; (j) shopping center; (k) industrial area; (l) brownﬁeld (with chemical pollution); (m) race track site; (n) municipal-use space Medium: (a) small semi-natural area; (b) crop ﬁeld; (c) meadow or fallow ﬁeld; (d) community garden (allotment garden, leisure garden, war garden); (e) waterworks/ supply facility; (f) sewage-treatment facility; (g) solid-waste/recycling site; (h) cemetery; (i) sand-and-gravel site; (j) large shrubby patch Outer Urban-region Ring

Broad-scale pattern of large greenspaces Corridors and networks: (a) river corridor; (b) highway corridor and rectilinear network; (c) coastline; (d) pipeline; (e) electric powerline; (f) emerald network Patches and background matrix: (a) cropland landscape or matrix; (b) forest/woodland landscape or matrix; (c) grassland landscape or matrix; (d) desert landscape or matrix; (e) low-density residential area

Fine-scale pattern of small greenspaces Corridors and networks: (a) stream corridor and dendritic network; (b) canal corridor and dendritic/rectilinear network; (c) hedgerow Patches: (a) lake; (b) reservoir; (c) wetland (marsh, peatland, swamp); (d) rock quarry; (e) sand-and-gravel site

Greenspaces

City and metropolitan area

River corridors typically serve as a major infrastructure conduit for the city and are squeezed by numerous engineered hard structures. Small gravel maintenance roads on the ﬂoodplain are common. Normal water levels are low, in part due to groundwater pumping, while peak ﬂows and ﬂood hazard are higher (Groffman et al. 2003). Pipes carry stormwater, human wastewater, and industrial pollutants rapidly to the river which becomes severely polluted. Stagnant pools and wetlands seasonally breed clouds of mosquitoes and midges (Robinson 1996). Natural vegetation on the ﬂoodplain absorbs some ﬂoodwater and supports rich biodiversity. Recreation may be important in river corridors. Highway corridors are sources of vehicular and road pollutants, which are washed by stormwater into water bodies. Trafﬁc noise degrades nearby habitat for many wildlife species. Railway corridors suffer loud intermittent noise, but still may be rather effective conduits for wildlife movement. Steep slopes covered by residential developments or squatter settlements have elevated hydrologic, erosion, and sedimentation problems, and are more susceptible to periodic environmental disasters. Coastlines have very little protected area so remnant natural beach, dune, vegetation, and wetlands along the coast are rare habitats with concentrations of rare species. Also, the paucity of natural coastal area means that nearby aquatic ecosystems are severely degraded. In the metro area a large semi-natural park, as the best facsimile of nature, commonly has educational and inspirational value, but also may have security problems. Commonly a few relatively rare species are present. Furthermore a large semi-natural greenspace (Konijnendijk et al. 2005): (1) serves as a major source of species dispersing to other city greenspaces; (2) reduces ﬂood hazard; (3) cools surrounding downwind built areas for a considerable distance; and (4) attracts birds migrating across the metro area. A large urban wood-lawn park also provides the last four beneﬁts. A railway yard tends to be rich in non-native species mainly transported by trains. At a ﬁner scale, tree lines provide continuous cover and cool shade that enhance movement by people and birds. A shrub line provides cover and movement enhancement for terrestrial animals, and serves as a visual barrier for people, e.g., between house lots. A row of greenspace stepping stones enhances directional movement of some species. Vacant lots often teem with non-native species, and illustrate the process of succession plus the regeneration power of nature. School yards have deeply compacted soil, and may serve as roosts for gulls, geese, or ducks on windy nights. The urban cemetery is usually biologically impoverished, especially due to the scarcity of shrubs. Finally, green roofs capture and evaporate precipitation

109

110

Natural systems and greenspaces water, reduce stormwater runoff, cool the building and air, and provide a bit of biodiversity (Hien et al. 2007). Metro-area border and inner urban-region ring

A wide greenbelt outside the metro area constrains outward urbanization, while providing a trail system, cool clean air for the metro area, and convenient market-gardening areas (Munton 1983, Pandell et al. 2002, Whitehand and Morton 2004, Bengston and Youn 2006). A ring-of-parks, analogous to a greenbelt sliced by radial transportation corridors, loses the greenbelt connectivity, but has more neighboring residents who can use and care for the parklands (e.g., Budapest). Greenways or trails could connect the parks. Greenways particularly facilitate walking and biking recreation, but also provide water and habitat protection (Briffett et al. 2000, Brifﬁtt 2001, Fernandez-Juricic 2000, Erickson 2006, Binford and Karty 2006). A green wedge projecting into a metro area provides proximity to greenspace for many residents, but especially facilitates recreational movement between city and countryside. Green wedges also enhance clean air ﬂows in the city, and the movement of species from countryside to urban greenspaces. Narrow stream corridors in this metro-area border area are mostly straightened, even discontinuous with water ﬂows in underground pipes. A pipeline corridor may be especially effective for wildlife movement, and maintenance activities usually result in creating a strip of common edge species. A string of pearls, as a tree-lined trail connecting small semi-natural patches (Forman 2004a), facilitates walking recreation and some species movement between the small patches or parks, which are easier to establish and protect than are greenways. Patches around the metro-area border are extremely diverse. A golf course is an intensive water, fertilizer, and pesticide user, and usually is biologically impoverished because in construction the natural habitat heterogeneity was largely homogenized, and now shrub cover, dead trees, and logs are scarce. A nursery-plants area also pours on the water, fertilizer, and pesticide, while serving as a major source of non-native and invasive species which are widely dispersed across residential and commercial areas. A botanical garden, also using water, fertilizer, and pesticide, grows an exceptionally rich collection of native and non-native plants, and presumably is also a source of dispersing exotic and invasive species. A market-gardening area, perhaps using still more water, fertilizer, and pesticide, provides convenient fresh food and sometimes family and social beneﬁts, while often polluting the groundwater beneath. A wetland commonly absorbs stormwater which reduces ﬂood hazard, supports rich biodiversity, and provides swarms of seasonal mosquitoes. Finally a lake here usually is ringed by development for the relatively wealthy, is polluted, and offers boating and ﬁshing recreation.

Greenspaces At a ﬁner scale, a community garden provides family food, social beneﬁts, and rich food for wildlife. A sewage-treatment facility cleans human waste, but is often a source of pollution overﬂows in heavy storm events and air-borne pathogenic microorganisms. A solid-waste/recycling site also addresses the problem of societal wastes, and is a magnet for concentrations of rats, gulls, or other scavengers, often including people who recognize wastes as economic value. Outer urban-region ring

In the outer portion of an urban region, a broad-scale pattern of corridors, often connected into networks, is superimposed on the matrix and large patches. A river corridor upriver of the metro area may be quite clean or be heavily polluted by agricultural runoff, whereas downriver of the city, river water is polluted by urban and industrial processes. Highway corridors have trafﬁc-noise-created degradation zones on each side, and serve as major barriers to walkers and wildlife movement (Cuperus et al. 2001). The emerald network of large natural-vegetation patches connected by green corridors is an effective ﬂexible solution to sustain wildlife in the face of urbanization and climate-change processes. Forest/woodland, grassland, desert, and especially cropland are the background matrix and landscapes in urban-region (urb-region) rings. As such, they are predominant sources of species and form the framework for water conditions. Forest/woodland is particularly valuable for recreation in addition to wood production and wildlife cover, though ﬂooding, erosion, and sedimentation are chronic problems (Theobold et al. 1997, Konijnendijk et al. 2005). Grassland and desert are both subject to erosion, sedimentation, and loss of wildlife. For low-density residential areas, medium or relatively small house-lot sizes overwhelmingly degrade biodiversity and water conditions, whereas very large house lots may maintain only moderately degraded ecological conditions. The latter, therefore, may be suitable as buffers around large protected natural areas. At the ﬁne scale, a dendritic stream-corridor network is especially important in the outer urban-region ring. The stream network within large natural areas has a connected integrity which facilitates ﬁsh movements. On the other hand, in an agricultural area the stream network usually has narrow strips of riparian vegetation that provide shade and fallen wood as ﬁsh habitat, but that do relatively little to prevent stream pollution from runoff of eroded sediment and excess fertilizer. Trees and other woody vegetation along stream/river channels is largely removed by seasonal ﬂoods in some mountain areas (e.g., Santiago, Chile), and by human action in parts of England where channels are managed somewhat like large stormwater drains. Hedgerows often facilitate species movement across the landscape and reduce agricultural runoff. Lakes and especially

111

112

Natural systems and greenspaces reservoirs may have little development ringing them so that semi-natural shorelines help maintain clean water, viable aquatic ecosystems, ﬁsh populations, and ﬁshermen. In short, greenspaces are as rich in beneﬁts to society as are built spaces, such as commercial, industrial, high-rise residential, single-unit residential, and highways. Many greenspaces, however, are inextricably tied to location. Buildings and roads and parking lots can be built in many locations. In contrast, greenspaces containing lakes, wetlands, rivers, ﬂoodplains, mountain slopes, and so forth are solidly ﬁxed on the land. Wisely arranging built spaces around greenspaces is the planner’s and society’s challenge.

5

Thirty-eight urban regions

Selecting cities, determining boundaries, mapping regions What would you do if you wanted to understand urban regions? So many cities, so variable in size and geography -- the task seems daunting. You might enjoy traveling to and studying a good batch of them, but these are large complex objects and the enterprise would take years. Or you might devour books and articles on the subject, also a protracted process, which would provide a skewed picture dominated by a limited number of much-studied cities. Or simply talk to the experts (who wrote those books and articles). Here is the story of how I learned. Selecting cities worldwide

To get the big picture at the outset I pulled out maps, all sorts, and sketched the shapes and sizes of cities and especially how they are arranged relative to water bodies and mountains. Since I have lived in parts of North America, Europe, Latin America and Australia, initially the focus was on other areas, then gradually becoming worldwide. Quickly I was able to group the sketches into three big categories characterized by: (1) continent or geographic area; (2) location relative to rivers, bays, seacoasts, etc.; and (3) city size, as indicated by area. I decided that my mix of urban regions to be studied should include the typical range of variation within each of these groups, and that probably other useful categories or subcategories exist which should at least be represented. Also I estimated that 25 urban regions would be the minimum needed (which might or might not provide clear results), and that 50 regions would be the maximum possible based on time and resources available. When I am stuck indoors, the opportunity to study maps, read books and articles, and talk with experts is a pleasure, so these continued intensively for

113

114

Thirty-eight urban regions

Edmonton London Nantes

Ottawa

Portland Chicago San Diego/ Tijuana

Philadelphia Atlanta

Barcelona

Stockholm Moscow Berlin Bucharest Rome Erzurum

Tegucigalpa

Bamako

Abeche

Nairobi

Iquitos

Sapporo Seoul

Beijing

Kagoshima

Tehran Cairo

Mexico City

Ulaanbaatar

Rahimyar Khan Cuttack Bangkok Kuala Lumpur Samarinda

Brasilia

Santiago

East London Canberra

Figure 5.1 The 38 urban regions worldwide selected for analysis. City population sizes (>250 000) range from high to low in each of six geographic areas: Europe; North America; Latin America; Africa; West to East Asia; and South Asia to Australia.

many moons. Over 350 cities worldwide were at least brieﬂy considered, some in considerable detail. This process produced a set of primary criteria and secondary criteria, which formed the basis for ultimately selecting 38 urban regions (Figure 5.1).

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

Primary criteria World distribution (to represent a breadth of geographic areas/ continents and cultures). Wide range of predominant land covers around cities (e.g., forest/woodland, cropland). Wide range of city population sizes (in six categories, 0.25--0.5, 0.5--1, 1--2, 2--4, 4--8, and 8--16 million inhabitants in the city). Wide range of forms of metropolitan areas (e.g., rounded, lobed, elongated). Wide range of city locations relative to major water bodies (e.g., by river, lake, sea). Barcelona (Spain) was included (since it seemed to be the best-analyzed case study available). Secondary criteria (Generally used in selecting between two good candidate cities.)

(1)

Not near another city larger than itself, or >250 000 population (thus Vienna, Washington, and Lahore were not considered).

Selecting cities, determining boundaries, mapping regions (2) (3) (4) (5)

Good- or adequate-quality satellite image of urban region available at time of city selection (thus Bogota, Lagos, Xi’an not considered). Form of metropolitan area seemingly can be extrapolated to many other cities (thus Johannesburg, Naples, New York not considered). Considerable useful ecological and planning information on the region readily available (thus Berlin, Chicago, Ottawa included). Author familiarity with the urban region through residency, work, or travel.

Population of a city rather than of the metropolitan area or urban region was used as the indicator of size, because somewhat consistent and reliable data are available for all of the cities (Turner 2005). Population data for the cities chosen were for 1999--2002, with four exceptions: Iquitos (Peru) was 334 000 in 1998, Abeche (Chad) 188 000 in 1993, Samarinda (Indonesia) 335 000 in 1990, Rahimyar Khan (Pakistan) 234 000 in 1998. All were adjusted to the year 2000 using a 5 % annual growth rate. For convenience in comparing major worldwide cities, small cities have 0.25 to 1 million, medium cities 1 to 4 million, and large cities 4 to 16 million inhabitants. Satellite cities located around a major city are smaller, with <250 000 inhabitants. Geographic area was used instead of continent to better capture the combination of location and culture, and so that each geographic area included a similar number (ﬁve to eight) of urban regions studied (Table 5.1). The six geographic areas were: Europe, North America, Latin America, Africa, West to East Asia [Moscow and Erzurum (Turkey) to Sapporo], and South Asia to Australia [Rahimyar Khan (Pakistan) to Samarinda (Indonesia) and Canberra]. I have lived in or near nine of the urban regions (Atlanta, Barcelona, Canberra, Chicago, London, Mexico City, Ottawa, Philadelphia, Tegucigalpa), and visited another ten (Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, Beijing, Portland (Oregon), Edmonton, San Diego, Stockholm, Bucharest, Rome, Berlin). This general familiarity helped especially in understanding the urban region beyond the city. However, I have never seen half of the 38 regions analyzed, which highlights the importance of the three primary analytic approaches used: measuring remotely sensed images, literature survey, and consultations with knowledgeable persons. An initial set of cities was selected because they are well known in the literature for illustrating key planning and ecological patterns, or I had accumulated especially useful ecological information on them (Barcelona, Berlin, Stockholm, San Diego, Portland, Chicago, Atlanta, Ottawa, Mexico City, Brasilia, Canberra, Beijing). Large satellite images were printed for 120 urban regions under consideration. From these, several additional distinctive, but widely applicable, patterns stood out, and those cities were selected accordingly (Santiago,

115

116

Thirty-eight urban regions Bucharest, Edmonton, Iquitos [Peru], Moscow, Bangkok). The remaining 20 cities were selected to provide a balanced set of urban regions that accomplished the primary and secondary criteria listed (Table 5.1). Determining urban-region and metro-area boundaries

A major city, as well as its boundaries, normally cannot be seen on a satellite or other aerial image. Instead, a large mass of built area stands out, often relatively compact, but sometimes diffusely grading into greenspace (unbuilt area) at its edge. The city is inside the large built area, typically with the city center centrally located. This large central clearly visible object, the essentially continuous built area, is herein called the metropolitan area or simply metro area (see Figure 1.1). In general, its boundary is easily determined and marked on the large images. In spots one of two mapping decisions has to be made. How wide does a strip of greenspace need to be to exclude a peripheral built area as a separate suburb or town, or to cut off a greenspace wedge projecting into the metro area? A greenspace width of 1 km (0.6 mi) was used as a general guideline. The other mapping decision related to low-density housing development, mainly an issue around portions of US cities. The general guideline cutoff used was a large group of 2 ha (5 acre) house lots; areas with smaller house lots were considered built and larger lots unbuilt. More interesting and signiﬁcant to this book is how to determine the urbanregion boundary. Arguably the central importance of an urban region relates to interactions -- ﬂows and movements -- back and forth between the city and its surroundings. In this sense the urban region is a functional region. One can ask and learn, ‘‘How does it work? What are the types, directions, and intensities of interactions?” Delineating the urban-region boundary thus simply requires an estimate of the intensity of ﬂows and movements along radial lines extending out from the city center. The boundary is where inward and outward interactions noticeably decrease. Numerous attributes affect movements and ﬂows inward and outward, and data on as many as possible were mapped on the large aerial images. Several attributes initially thought to be important turned out not to be so, because they usually did not extend very far beyond the metropolitan area (ends of commuter rail lines, communities with substantial commuter populations, airports, sewage-treatment facilities, solid-waste disposal sites, reduced air-quality areas). Rivers and highways hardly ever delineated urban-region boundaries. Wetlands were too scarce around urban regions to be important determinants. In contrast, mountain ranges often delineated urban-region boundaries. Major political/administrative borders often determined boundaries of a region. Another nearby major city (>250 000 population) with its own urban region

Selecting cities, determining boundaries, mapping regions frequently helped delineate a region boundary. However, boundary location seemed dependent on the relative size of the core city vs. the other city. If the other city was larger, a point 40 % of the distance from core city to other city was arbitrarily marked as a preliminary estimate of boundary location. If the other city was smaller and >250 000 population, a 60 % point was marked. If the outer city was smaller and also <250 000 population, the 70 % point was marked. One-day recreation or tourism sites were also signiﬁcant boundary delineators, the idea being that both the core city and the sites are important economically and culturally to each other, and cannot be too far apart relative to the transportation system. Major biodiversity areas, either impacted by or dependent on protection by people of the city, sometimes helped delineate boundaries. Outlines of the drainage basin around major water supplies were often important in determining urban-region boundaries. Finally, where none of the preceding seemed important, a radius of approximately 100 km was chosen. Partly this was because almost all the other delineated urban-region boundaries were in the 70--100 km range. And partly it was selected as a typical maximum distance on a paved highway with trafﬁc that large numbers of people would travel back and forth in one day for shopping, recreation, and so forth. Even around remote cities with unpaved radial roads, 100 km may be a reasonable distance, for example, for once-a-week shopping or business trips. Mapping urban regions

While literature, consultations, and direct observations helped understand urban regions, the core analysis were measurements of spatial patterns on large remotely sensed images (c. 70 × 100 cm and 1:200 000 scale). Consistent base maps for urban regions using Landsat satellite geospatial data, with a 30 m cell or pixel size, were generated from the Earth Science Data Interface (2006 website) of the University of Maryland’s Global Land Cover Facility, College Park, Maryland, USA. The data were organized in color spectra that provided the ability to separate red, green, and blue, as well as more advanced bands that could separate urban areas from forest, meadow areas, and the like. The data were ﬁnally manipulated in the ESRI ArcGIS 9.1 geographic information system. The Arc Tool ‘‘Composite Bands” allowed for an image to be created, and point scaling was used to create a number of different images. All ﬂights for the remotely sensed images of the 38 urban regions were in 2001 ± 1 year (except Santiago, Tegucigalpa, and Sapporo, ﬂown in late 1999). The mapping process was a series of steps that created an aerial image as part of a comprehensive database (see Appendix I). The steps began by extracting the raw band of color from the Earth Science Data Interface and ended with

117

118

Thirty-eight urban regions image processing in Arcview. The resulting image was printed in color with the city in the approximate center. Preliminary determination of the boundaries for many urban regions found that boundaries rarely extend in any direction more than 100 km from center city, so images were printed with a diameter of approximately 200 km. After considerable consultation with GIS (geographic information systems) specialists, I decided that hand measurements using planimeter and ruler on clear plastic sheets over the satellite images was the optimal procedure. Sufﬁcient quality, accuracy, and consistency to accomplish the objectives seemed unavailable by GIS analysis without considerably more time and resources than were available. Especially worrisome was the uncertain ability to correctly differentiate by computer the hundreds of land covers in urban regions worldwide. Doubtless I would make some errors in image interpretation, but based on 35 years of landscape ecology work and analyzing/ground-truthing maps and GIS images in many nations, the decision to use manual rather than GIS measurements ended up an easy one. With the 30 m cell-size resolution on the satellite image, two-lane highways were often invisible or hard to follow, whereas most of a multilane highway length was clearly evident. Streams and small rivers disappeared in agricultural and built landscapes, the predominant land covers in most urban regions, except where wide stream-corridor vegetation was present. In forested landscapes, rivers and streams less than about ﬁfth-order (Wetzel 2001, Kalff 2002) could seldom be followed, because the open strip in the tree canopy was too narrow. The rare forested wetland generally was not differentiable from forest. Hedgerows, individual houses, and narrow two-lane roads normally were invisible. In contrast, major airports, shipping/ferry ports, and large mines or quarries were quite prominent. Normally I could differentiate: marsh from other open areas; mangrove swamp from other woodland/forest; dammed reservoirs from lakes; mountain ridges (but not hills); villages and hamlets; and direction of surface-water drainage and stream/river ﬂow. Urban-region boundaries, metropolitan areas, and numerous speciﬁc objects were marked on the large images (c. 70 × 100 cm). Spatial measurements (area, shape, distance, and number) were then made for both marked attributes and unmarked patterns. When new information and corrections became infrequent for an urban region, the markings were copied with black pen onto a small image (43 × 43 cm) of the region. An illustrator then converted the major land covers marked into brightly colored maps and computer-reduced the images for printing in this book. The colors represent a balance between standard urban-planning practices and the ability to differentiate land covers in a black-and-white photocopy of the image.

Plate section

Color Figure 1 Key to cover types and site labels for maps of 38 urban regions (Color ﬁgures 2--39). Asterisks (∗ ) on certain maps refer to the following: Bangkok (aquaculture along bayshore; canal inland); Beijing (canal); Cairo (canal); Chicago (canal); Edmonton (Native People’s land); Kagoshima (lava ﬂow); London (barrier across river within metro area; greenbelt around metro area; transportation tunnel entrance/exit to the southeast); Mexico City (ice, snow, and alpine tundra atop volcanoes; lava ﬂow to the southeast); Nairobi (ice, snow, and alpine tundra); Philadelphia (saltwater intrusion to the southeast; 40 % of distance to a larger city, i.e., New York to the northeast); Ottawa (greenbelt around metro area; 40 % of distance to a larger city, i.e., Montreal to the east); Portland (urban growth boundary around metro area; ice, snow, and alpine tundra atop volcano; lava ﬂows to the northeast); Rahimyar Khan (oasis and fort in use in desert; 40 % of distance to a larger city, i.e., Bahawalpur, to northeast is marked by main road; green area is an intermixture of cropland, small-tree farming, and natural vegetation); Rome (ice, snow, and alpine tundra); Santiago (ice, snow, and alpine tundra); Seoul (greenbelt around metro area; demilitarized zone to the north; barriers across mouths of rivers to the southwest); Sapporo (ice, snow, and alpine tundra); Tehran (ice, snow, and alpine tundra atop volcanoes; lava ﬂows on volcano slopes to the northeast); Ulaanbaatar (canal by metro area; ice, snow, and alpine tundra to the northeast).

Color Figure 2 Abeche, Chad urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 3 Atlanta, USA urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 4 Bamako, Mali urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 5 Bangkok, Thailand urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 6 Barcelona, Spain urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 7 Beijing, China urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 8 Berlin, Germany urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 9 Brasilia, Brazil urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 10 Bucharest, Romania urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 11 Cairo, Egypt urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 12 Canberra, Australia urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 13 Chicago, USA urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 14 Cuttack, India urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 15 East London, South Africa urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 16 Edmonton, Canada urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 17 Erzurum, Turkey urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 18 Iquitos, Peru urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 19 Kagoshima, Japan urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 20 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 21 London, United Kingdom urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 22 Mexico City, Mexico urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 23 Moscow, Russia urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 24 Nairobi, Kenya urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 25 Nantes, France urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 26 Ottawa, Canada urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 27 Philadelphia, USA urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 28 Portland, USA urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 29 Rahimyar Khan, Pakistan urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 30 Rome, Italy urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 31 Samarinda, Indonesia urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 32 San Diego/Tijuana, USA/Mexico urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 33 Santiago, Chile urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 34 Sapporo, Japan urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 35 Seoul, South Korea urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 36 Stockholm, Sweden urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 37 Tegucigalpa, Honduras urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 38 Tehran, Iran urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 39 Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia urban region. See Color Figure 1 for key to cover types and site labels.

Color Figure 40 Mosaics of multi-colored broken ceramic pieces in Parque Guell, Barcelona, Spain; designed by Antoni Gaudi. R. Forman photo.

Color Figure 41 Nature in the Barcelona Region. Adapted from Forman (2004a).

Color Figure 42 Food in the Barcelona Region. Adapted from Forman (2004a).

Color Figure 43 Water in the Barcelona Region. Adapted from Forman (2004a).

Color Figure 44 Built Areas and Systems in the Barcelona Region. Adapted from Forman (2004a).

Key spatial attributes Finally, key sites and features marked were converted to pictograms for easier recognition.

Key spatial attributes Having selected the 38 cities around the globe and determined the boundaries of their urban regions, a still more daunting task lay in wait. What is important in a region? Somehow the most important areas and sites needed to be identiﬁed and mapped. Some are visible on the aerial images, but many are too small and had to be located from published maps, literature, and consultations with knowledgeable persons. ‘‘Important” here refers to attributes needed to understand the natural systems present, their human uses, and more broadly, how the region works. Land cover types

For most analyses, the numerous land covers present in the 38 urban regions worldwide were distilled to 14 major ones, which were mapped -- nine area-cover types and ﬁve linear-cover types. All but one (region boundary) were visible on the satellite images. Because some linear features are narrow and less distinct, published maps were occasionally used for clariﬁcation in the mapping process. A few analyses used other subtle or less common cover types which were not mapped (e.g., railroads, different crop types, different building-density areas). The 14 major land covers were: (A) (B) (C)

(D) (E)

(F)

Salt water (sea, coastal bay). Freshwater (lake, reservoir, river, major stream). Forest/woodland (forest of tall trees and relatively continuous closed canopy, woodland of smaller trees and relatively open canopy; in some climates the two types are intermixed and difﬁcult to separate on aerial images). Small-tree farming (especially coffee, tea, and oil palm plantations). Cropland (cultivated/tilled ﬁelds covering at least 75 % of the area, the non-cultivated portion usually being forest/woodland and/or built area; includes non-irrigated and irrigated land). Grassland/pastureland (includes ranchland, paddockland, and grassdominated savanna with scattered trees or tree clusters; cropland ﬁelds are much smaller than the relatively distinct pastures/paddocks [rarely evident in desert/desertiﬁed areas] which characterize most pastureland).

119

120

Thirty-eight urban regions (G)

(H) (I) (J)

(K) (L) (M) (N)

Desert/desertiﬁed area (desert with <25 cm annual precipitation, sometimes sand-covered, but more typically stony/rocky with sparse low shrubs and other plants; desertiﬁed area overgrazed, eroded, salinized, and/or water-table-lowered by human activity). Metropolitan area (the essentially continuous built area including a central major city). Small/medium built area (satellite city or a town; based on area, not population; villages, hamlets normally not included). River/major stream (in moist climates typically at least a fourth-order stream [Wetzel 2001]; in dry climates with seasonal surface-water ﬂows, a relatively wide [typically >30 m] ﬂoodwater channel). Multilane highway (usually a four-lane divided highway; sometimes more trafﬁc lanes). Paved two-lane main road (asphalt/tarmac/concrete surface; mapped in regions with few or no multilane highways outside the metro area). Unpaved main road (mapped around cities with few or no paved main roads outside the metro area). Urban-region boundary (determined as described in the preceding section; not visible on aerial image).

Site types

From several dozen possible spatial attributes considered and partially mapped, the following 26 types of major sites were considered especially important and found to be widespread. The absence of a mapped area or site on an image usually means it does not exist. In some cases it may exist, but no information was located. Although often many small sites exist, only major sites were mapped. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

(6)

Dock area for shipping and/or ferry. Industrial area (usually a group of industries; occasionally a single large one). Sewage treatment facility (often only many small ones are present). Solid-waste disposal (sometimes combined with a recycling facility). Water-quality poor (data not easily obtained or interpreted, so typically a water body downslope of a city, industrial area, sewage treatment facility, or mine site is marked). Air-quality poor (data not easily obtained or interpreted, so typically locations in center city and downwind of the city or an industrial area are marked).

Key spatial attributes (7)

(8) (9)

(10) (11)

(12)

(13)

(14) (15)

(16) (17) (18) (19)

(20)

(21)

Flood-hazard area (data not easily obtained, so typically metro-area locations up to a few meters higher than adjoining rivers or seacoasts are marked). Fire-hazard area (data not easily obtained, so typically locations in dry climates where forest/woodland adjoins built areas are marked). Airport (includes the primary busy airport for city, other passenger airport, military airport, and, in at least one case [Edmonton], a large decommissioned airport). Noise of ﬂying aircraft (data not easily obtained, so locations extending c. 3--5 km (2--3 mi) out from major runways [Miller 2005] are marked). Nearby slopes facing city (covered by natural vegetation, agriculture, or built area [wealthy to slum], these slopes are of special visual, recreation, erosion, ﬂooding, cooling, air-cleaning, and biodiversity importance associated with proximity to city). Market-gardening area for vegetables/fruits near city (sometimes called truck farming, this area provides low-transportation-cost fresh produce for city markets and restaurants [Chapter 3], and is often threatened by development). End of commuter rail (most radial commuter-rail lines serve the metro area, but some extend outward to satellite cities and towns [e.g., London, Philadelphia]). Commuter residential area (data not easily obtained, so locations are mostly based on consultations with knowledgeable persons). Biodiversity area (data not easily obtained, so, as elaborated below, locations mostly based on parks, natural areas, etc. on published maps, and on distinctive topographic and landscape ecological patterns). Wetland (generally rare in urban regions due to drainage and ﬁlling). Salt ﬂat or intermittent lake (intermittent lake seasonally or periodically dries up, often leaving a salt ﬂat). Volcano (active or apparently recently so). Mine site or quarry (for valuable minerals, coal, or sand/gravel; data not easily obtained; since quarries and most mine sites are usually small, only large mine sites prominent on images are marked). Water-supply source (location where water is extracted from a water body; a few cities depend on groundwater wells or streams, so general areas are marked). Drainage area around water supply (without topographic maps in many cases, the general area seemingly most important for water-supply protection is marked).

121

122

Thirty-eight urban regions (22)

(23) (24)

(25) (26)

Recreation/tourist area for one-day trip (based mainly on parks, natural areas, cultural features, etc. from published maps and travel guides, plus consultations with knowledgeable persons). Mountain range (approximate ridgeline marked). Political/administrative boundary (boundary of another major political/ administrative unit, e.g., nation [San Diego/Tijuana example], state or province [Philadelphia], or county [Edmonton], is marked when somewhat perpendicular to a radius of the region to help determine the region’s boundary). Sixty percent of distance to a smaller, but >250 000 population, city (recognizing that the outside city has its own urban region). Seventy percent of distance to <250 000 population city outside region (recognizing that the outside city has its own urban region, and that it is a smaller city than in the preceding case; 70 % [and/or 60 %] occasionally appears twice in about the same direction on an image because of two cities in that direction).

The last six site types (numbers 21--26) were particularly important in determining the boundaries of urban regions, as highlighted in the preceding section. Biodiversity areas (number 15 above) have a special importance in urban regions because of the high concentration of people and their manifold effects. These sites usually have importance far beyond maintaining rare species and natural communities. Many biodiversity areas maintain water resources, provide diverse recreation, protect cultural heritage resources, provide high visual quality, minimize soil erosion and stream sedimentation, provide wood products, and accomplish other key objectives of society. Since rigorous data on biodiversity areas in urban regions are rarely available or easily obtainable, a protocol for identifying these was developed. In a few cases (e.g., Edmonton, Chicago, London) ecologists and other experts have identiﬁed many of the most important biodiversity areas, which provides a good basis for mapping. In many urban regions published maps, travel guides, and other literature identiﬁed biodiversity areas in the form of parks, natural areas, wildlife conservation areas, and the like, which were mapped. Then for some urban regions, knowledgeable consultants were able to pinpoint a few key biodiversity areas. However, in addition the aerial images and other maps were further examined through the lens of landscape ecology (Forman 1995, Farina 2005, Groom et al. 2006) to identify and mark probable key biodiversity areas. This highlighted ﬁve important types of biodiversity areas:

Key spatial attributes (a)

(b) (c)

(d)

(e)

Rare features in the urban region were marked: topographic (e.g., volcano [Portland], high point next to the sea where migrating birds congregate [Barcelona]); geologic (limestone area [Barcelona], island [Bangkok]); vegetational (mangrove swamp [Kagoshima], palm oasis [Rahimyar Khan]); water-body (lake [Nairobi], freshwater wetland [Ottawa]); and humancreated (reservoir [Beijing], large long-established military base rich in biodiversity [San Diego] [Goodman 1996, Leslie et al. 1996]). Large areas of natural vegetation, differentiated by type where possible (e.g., marsh, forest), were marked. Isolated areas of potentially viable natural vegetation were marked (palm oasis [Rahimyar Khan], salt ﬂat [Tehran]). These are likely to support many uncommon species and to be key sources of species for populating surrounding areas. The nearest lobes of natural vegetation projecting toward a metropolitan area (Rome, Bucharest) were marked. These are key sources of species that colonize parks and other greenspaces across the metro area, as well as nearby access points to nature for recreationists from the city. Strategically located sites for regional connectivity, i.e., species movement and water ﬂow, were marked. These include gaps or narrows connecting large natural areas and a row of natural ‘‘stepping stones” (Ulaanbaatar, Nantes).

Even using these diverse approaches for pinpointing major biodiversity areas, the maps are incomplete, often woefully so. Nevertheless, because of the many other major beneﬁts provided for society, as listed above, these sites are among the most important anywhere in the urban region. In addition to the 26 widespread site types above, 16 others were infrequent in the urban regions, but were deemed important and mapped: (1) (2) (3) (4)

(5) (6) (7)

Ice and snow (atop high mountains; Santiago, Ulaanbaatar, Portland, Erzurum, Sapporo, Tehran). Lava bed (Mexico City, Kagoshima, Portland). Canal (Beijing, Cairo, Bangkok, Berlin, Moscow). Forty percent of distance to a neighboring larger city (Ottawa, Philadelphia, San Diego, Rahimyar Khan; this recognizes that a larger nearby city probably has a larger urban region). Barrier across river (Seoul, London). Greenbelt (London, Ottawa, Seoul). Urban-growth boundary (Portland).

123

124

Thirty-eight urban regions (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16)

Saltwater intrusion into aquifer (Barcelona). Aquaculture area (Bangkok). Demilitarized zone (Seoul). Oasis and fort in use (Rahimyar Khan). Native People’s land (Edmonton, San Diego/Tijuana). Transportation tunnel entrance/exit (London). Concentrated greenhouses (Barcelona). Large recently logged clearcuts (Canberra). Intermixture of cropland, small-tree farming, and bits of natural vegetation (Cairo, Rahimyar Khan).

Nuclear power plants, though not mapped, operate in 17 of the 31 nations represented in this analysis (John P. Holdren, personal communication), and are present in several of the 38 urban regions. Recently the nuclear power plants in the London and Portland urban regions have been decommissioned with fuelcells removed. In the Portland case the facility was then dynamited into oblivion. Numerous published maps were used to aid in mapping areas and sites within urban regions, the most common being: national and regional road maps; world atlas maps; DeLorme topographic maps (USA); National Imagery and Mapping Agency (declassiﬁed) maps (USA); keyhole website maps. When in doubt, the pattern visible on the 30 m-pixel Landsat aerial image was used. Built areas mapped are mainly intermixed residential and commercial areas. Since residential and commercial areas have very different effects, both as areas and as sources and sinks, future work might usefully separate them. Similarly, future work might differentiate areas by population density, socioeconomic status, and so forth, since the effects on the areas and on surrounding areas, are so different. Future work might also usefully include power sources, such as hydro, nuclear, coal, biomass, wind and solar, since the effects of production and transport on the urban region markedly differ. Also mapping other hazard areas, such as earthquake (Sapporo, Mexico City, San Diego), cyclone/hurricane (Bangkok, Kagoshima), and volcanic eruption probabilities, is desirable. Intercity rail lines were omitted since their trains only stop in the city, but mapping rail stations for commuters outside the metropolitan area would be valuable. Adding such common urban history and planning parameters to the major patterns explored in these analyses should provide valuable added insight into the big picture. Finally, people knowledgeable in speciﬁc urban regions and who have experience with mapping will know that all boundaries, land-cover types, and sites marked should be considered approximate, and that all the maps are incomplete and probably contain, hopefully minor, errors. More complete maps with these

Place-name synopses of the regions types of information can and should be developed by local experts for urban region planning around every city.

Thirty-eight urban regions mapped Thirty-eight brightly colored maps (Color Figures 1--39), a treasure-chest of information unraveled for the reader, have resulted from the sequence of detailed procedures and decisions above. Although measurements and spatial analyses were done directly with the large satellite images, these color maps are the ﬂagship syntheses of the urban regions. They are designed for easy reference as we compare regions to discover patterns and principles in the next two chapters.

Place-name synopses of the regions These cities and their urban regions are real places, with strikingly different natural systems and people living, working, and moving about. To help provide a ‘‘ﬂavor” or ‘‘personality” to each place, an array of place names in and around a region is listed, often with key characteristics added. Years for population data and satellite images used in analyses are given, along with scattered ecology and planning references. Many of the place names offer insights into the land, history, people, culture, and feel of a place. Slowly reading through the names, even saying them aloud, should help avoid drowning in data-rich maps, tables, and ﬁgures. Better still, ﬁnd and absorb some in-depth descriptions of these places, and visit them. Abeche (Chad)

Sub-Sahara Sahel. Oum-Hadjer. Ati. Parc National de Zakouma. Am-Dam. Koulbo. Dopdopdop. Adre. Batha. Biltine. Osara Wall. Abougoudam. Arada. HarazDjombo. O. Enne. Gara. Am Humede. Aboy Goulem. Koulbo. Tiktike. Deressa. Am Sak. O. Rime. Am Zoer. O. Bitea. Saoue. Ougoune. Sudan and Darfur to east. Lake Chad, Nigeria, and Niger to west. Central Africa to south. Libya to north. Steeples and minarets. Moving dunes. Cutoff in all directions by rain-full wadis and zones inondables. Escarpment. Savanna to grassland to desert. (1993 population, adjusted to year 2000 using 5 % annual growth rate; 2002 satellite image) Atlanta (USA) Stone Mountain. Decatur. Fulton. DeKalb. Reservoir Lake Lanier. Chattahoochee River. Marietta. Calhoun. Ludville. Pine Log. Red Top Mountain. Five Forks. New Hope. Chief Joseph Vann House. Agnes Scott. Cherokee. Starrs Mill.

125

126

Thirty-eight urban regions Kennesaw Mt. National Battleﬁeld. Sweetwater Creek. Rico. Lagrange. Grifﬁn. Experiment. Indian Springs. McDonough. Oconee. Walnut Grove. Chestnut Mt. Coal Mt. Peachtree Street. Panthersville. The South. The longest commute. Cakes of red mud. (2000 pop.; 2000 image) (Odum and Turner 1990, Bullard et al. 2000, Frumkin et al. 2004, Burchell et al. 2005, Berger 2006) Bamako (Mali)

Niger River. Chateau d’Eau. Sanankoroba. Koulikoro. Baguinedo. Foret de la Faya. Fana. Ouenia Lake. Nossombougou. Sirakorola. Fort de Koundou. Kati. Negala. Monte Manding. Sibi. Soussan. Reserve de Keniebaoule. Dlamba. Marche Rose. Kamablo. Kangaba. Pont des Martyrs. Torokorobougou. Submersible causeway. Ivory Coast to south. Guinea and Senegal to west. Mauritania to north. Burkino Faso to east. Timbuktu downriver to northeast. Watching boats. Mande music. (1999 pop.; 2002 image) Bangkok (Thailand)

Chao Phraya delta. Ratchaburi. Nakhon Nayak. Suphan Buri. The Golden Mount. Ban Bung. Ayutthaya. Khao Yai National Park. Pattaya. U-Thong. Siam Square. Chachoengsao. Si Racha. Nam Tok Heo Narok. Saraburi. Nakhon Pathom. Sanut Saklon. Gulf of Thailand. Wat Amphawan. Sal Noi. Phutthamonthon. Tha Maka. Fulbright Ofﬁce. Bang Pla Ma. Na Di. Bang Pa-In. Samphran. Lam Lukka. Burma to west. Cambodia to east. Linear villages. Aquacultured crustaceans. (2000 pop.; 2002 image) (Beesley and Cocklin 1982, Takaya 1987, Stubbs and Clarke 1996, Tonmanee and Kuneepong 2004, Hara et al. 2005, McGrath and Thaitakoo 2005) Barcelona (Spain)

Parque Guell. Las Ramblas. Sagrada Familia. Llobregat River. Agricultural Park. La Tordera. Vic sausages. Ter reservoirs. Sabadell. El Vendrell. Les Cuatro Gats. Igualada. Manresa. Mataro. Garraf. Castelltallat. Montseny. El Corredor. Calaf grain. Collserola. Montserrat. Besos. Foix reservoir. Mercat St. Joseph. Marmellar gorge. Penedes wine. Valles. Mediterranean beaches. Montjuic. Catalunya. Sardana. Segnale. France to east. Wetland. Pig farms. Salt mines. Greenhouses. Dolmens. (2001 pop.; 2002 image) (Vallejo and Alloza 1998, Forman 2004a, Pauleit et al. 2005, Mayor Farguell 2005, Mata and Tarroja 2006) Beijing (People’s Republic of China)

Great Wall. Forbidden City. Temple of Heaven. Tsinghua University. Tiananmen Square. Confucius Temple. Great Hall of the People. Dadu/Khanbalik. Ming Tombs feng-shi. Summer Palace. Peking University. Two large reservoirs,

Place-name synopses of the regions one for drinking. Dust from Inner Mongolia. Ring roads. Summer Olympics. Air pollution. Grid city. Mountain range. Friendly beloved dragons. Bicycles. (1999 pop.; 2000 image) (Sit 1995, Gu and Kesteloot 1998, Chen et al. 2004, Yang 2004) Berlin (Germany)

Brandenburg. Potsdam. Spreewald. Kostrzyn. Ruiner Canal. Naturpark. Schwedt. Buch. River Oder. Kyritz. Baumgarten. Lindenberg. Frankfurt. Plan. Petersdorf. Luckenwalde. Karlshof. Bad Saarow-Pieskow. Krausnicker Berge. Waldstadt. Rathenow. Britz. Hammer. Blankenfelde. Bretzsee. Zixdorf. Poland to east. France to west. The Wall, East and West. Industrial/agricultural collectives. Sudgelande railroad exotics. Biotopes. Tiergarten transformations. (2001 pop.; 2000 image) (Sukopp and Werner 1983, Sukopp and Hejny 1990, von Stulpnagel et al. 1990, Godde et al. 1995, Breuste et al. 1998, Kuhbler 2000, Mauerer et al. 2000, Von Krosigk 2001, Bahlburg 2003, Girot 2004, Rink 2005, Pauleit et al. 2005, Kowarik and Langer 2005) Brasilia (Brazil)

The Cerrado. Lake Brasilia. Goiania. Anapolis. Serra Geral do Pasana. Formosa. Luziania. Gama. Sobriadiaho. Barragem do Descoberto. Preto. Sao Bartolomeu River. Planaltina. Corumba de Goias. Brazlandia. Padre Bernardo. Mimoso. Lake Brasilia. Salto de Itiquira. Bom Sucesso. Rodeador Peak. Cd. Eclectica. Pedra Fundamental. Bananal. Amazonas to north. Atlantic to east. Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo to south. Planned city. (2000 pop.; 2001 image) (Epstein 1973, Starling 2000, Hall 2002, Oliveira and Marquis 2002) Bucharest (Romania)

Carpethians. Danube River. Giurgiu. Buftea. Titu. Snagov. Ploiesti. Oltenita. Slobozia. Ialomita River. Lake Dambovita. Ruse. Vedea River. Gaesti. Cucurugu. Sarbeni de Jos. Dragomeresti Vale. Baleni Romani. Balotesti. Strandul Titan. Fireta Mare. Dumbrava. Iszerul Mostistei. Baba Ana. Floreasca Park. Black Sea and Ukraine to east. Serbia to west. Bulgaria to south. Clejani Gypsy music. (2002 pop.; 2000 image) Cairo (Egypt)

The Nile. Al-Qahira. Giza Pyramids. Suez Canal. Rosetta, the stone location. The Fifth Aggregation. Heliopolis. Birket Qarum. El Faiyum. El Gharaq el Sultani. Beni Suef. Crocadilopolis. Philadelphia. El Wasta. Sol. El Lisht. Garza. The Sphinx. Saqqara. Warraq el Arab. Sadat City. Gebel Qatrani. Wadi el Natrun. Kulet el Qrein. Great Bitter Lake. Isma’iliya Canal. Zagazig. Benha. Ramsis. Shibin

127

128

Thirty-eight urban regions el Kom. Aswan Dam to south. Sahara to west. Mediterranean to north. Queen. (2002 pop.; 2000 image) (Vigier 1997) Canberra (Australia)

ACT. Cooma. Togganoggera. Yass. Bunyan. Doughboy. Jinglemoney. Cotter River. Snowy Mts. Lake George. Collector. Gundaroo. Goulburn. Yarrangobilly Caves. Lake Eucumbene. Kosciuszko. Tumut. Cockington Green. Boro. Goobarragandra Wilderness. ANU. Wee Jasper. Murrumbidgee River. Tidbinbilla. The Thunderer. Victoria to south. Tasman Sea to east. NSW to north. Planned Capital city. Brindabella Dreaming. Waves of invasives. Stockmen. Grifﬁn geometry. Yellow box-red gum. 2003 wildﬁre. Kamberri country. (2002 pop.; 2001 image) (Troy 1995, Hall 2002, Houston 2005, Rigby 2006) Chicago (USA)

Lake Michigan. O’Hare. Sears Tower. Des Plaines River. Gary. Stickney Wastewater Treatment. Johnsburg. Ivanhoe. Batavia. Saint Charles. Algonquin. Lake Zurich. Frankfort Square. Indiana Dunes. Calumet. Oswego. York Center. Hickory Hills. Romeoville. Joliet. Cook County. Black Oak. Minooka. Manhattan. National Tallgrass Prairie. The Loop. Deer park. Midwest shipping to the Atlantic. Agribusiness. Steel. Chicago Wilderness. Brownﬁelds. Bluff beaches. 1871 ﬁre. City Hall green roof. (2000 pop.; 2001 image) (Witham and Jones 1987, Cronon 1991, Nowak 1994, Heisler et al. 1994, Cityspace 1998, Benﬁeld et al. 1999, Calthorpe and Fulton 2001, Greenberg 2002, Daley and City of Chicago 2002, Hall 2002, Perlman and Milder 2005, Dwyer and Chavez 2005, Berger 2006) Cuttack (India)

Kataka. Orissa. Mahanadi delta. Kathajodi River. Puri. Paradip. Bhubaneswar the Capital. Khurda. Sunak-halla. Konark beach. Hindal. Atri hot sulfur spring. Bay of Bengal. Chilika Lake. Gop. Khandagiri Caves. Angul. Nandankanan Biological Park. Indipur. Altiri. Babaan Bazaar. Pipli. Fort Barabati. Subhash Chandra Bose. Calcutta and Bangladesh to northeast. Monsoonal sea of river water. Cane. Cricket. Rich ﬁligree. Rice research. High railway. Tigers and elephants. (2001 pop.; 2000 image) East London (South Africa)

Mgwali. Gonubie Mouth. King William’s Town. Hamburg. Keiskammahoek. Wavecrest. Oos-Londen. Morgan’s Bay. Fort Hare. Bolo Reserve. Qoboqobo. Potsdam. Kiva-Pita. Beacon Bay. Great Fish Point. Great Kei River Bridge. Mpetu. Roolkrans Dam. Committees. Zwelitsha. Amatola Mountains. Kidd’s Beach Nature

Place-name synopses of the regions Reserve. Braunschweig. Haga-Haga. Indian Ocean. Bonza Bay. Haga-Hago. Wild Coast. (1999 pop.; 2001 image) Edmonton (Canada)

Native People’s land. Stony Plain Moraine. Beaver Hills. Riverbend. Fort Saskatchewan. Leduc. Yellowhead Trail. Terrace Heights. Sturgeon. Petrochemical Alley. Big Lake. Saskatchewan to east. Canadian Rockies to west. River corridor. Long freight trains. Flat ranchland and cropland. Cold wind. Big river. Treasured poplar--aspen--spruce stands. Royal Alberta Museum. Shallow prairie lakes. The bison herd. (2001 pop.; 2002 image) (Saley et al. 2003, Wein 2006) Erzurum (Turkey)

Cifte Minare. Palaneloken peaks. Hunis. Tekman. Cat. Bayburt. Aras River. Coruh Nehri. Askale. Ispir. Ilica Spa. Pasinler. Dogu Karadeniz Mountains. Bingoze wetlands. Koprukoy. Tercan Reservoir. Dumludagi. Tortum Selalesi. Attaturk University. Kavurmacukuru. Haho. Narman. Horasan. Abdullahkomu. Toptepe. Hyspiratus. Black Sea to north. Armenia and Georgia to northeast. Kurdish centers and Iran to southeast. Treeless hills and steppe. Riparian vegetation. Dadas area. Skiing. (2000 pop.; 2002 image) Iquitos (Peru)

Nauta. 12 km wide powerful turbulent muddy Amazon. Rio Nanay. Mazan. Francisco de Orellana. Rio Napo. Tamshiyacu. Tigre. Lake Quistococha. Itaya River. Ex Petroleros. Trece de Febrero. El Dorado. Paujil. Rainforest-squeezed long narrow city. Boats coming, going. Native Peoples from la selva. Little-river transportation routes. Logging, deforestation, wood products up rivers. Road construction. Meanders. Erosion. Coca. Palm products. (1998 pop., adjusted to year 2000 using 5 % annual growth rate; 2001 image) (Browder and Godfrey 1997, Laurance et al. 2000, Maki et al. 2001) Kagoshima (Japan)

Sakurajima Volcano. Tarumizu. Sata Misaki. Osumi Hanto. Kushima. Shibushi Wan. Kagoshima Bay. Paciﬁc Ocean. Kanoy. Onajime. Hi Zaki. Osaki. Aira. Fukuyama. Kokubu. Kirishima Yaku National Park. Togo. Yokogawa. Izumi. Kushikino. Havato. Iriki. Ouza. Makurazaki. Ikedo Ko. Bono Misaki. Satsuma Hanto. Kuta Shima. Kaimon Dake. Kiire. Kawanabe. Kyushu, Japan’s subtropical South. Ryukyu Islands and East China Sea to south. Ferry boats and ﬁshing. Volcanic pufﬁngs. (2002 pop.; 2002 image) (Yamamoto 1930)

129

130

Thirty-eight urban regions Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia)

Straits of Malacca. Klang. Petaling Jaya. Secemban. Genting Highlands. Temerloh. Raub. Port Dickson. Karak. Bentong. Sabak Bernam. Slim. Melaka. Gn. Benom. Tembeling River. Kuala Selangor. Sri Menanti. Batu Caves. Taman Negara Park. Mah Meri Orang Asli. Pelabuhan Klang. Blue Lagoon. Kg. Jawi-jawi. Java and Indonesia to southwest. South China Sea to east. Tallest building. Active rainforest canopy. Oil palm snakes. (2000 pop.; 2001 image) (Rieley and Page 1995)

London (UK)

Tower Bridge. Westminster. Thames River. Slough. Windsor Castle. Luton. Heathrow. Weston-on-the-Sea. Cambridge. Bishop’s Stortford. Ascot. Aldershot. King George V Reservoir. Canterbury Cathedral. Isle of Grain. Sevenoaks Weald. Letherhead. Kew Gardens. Brent. Wimbledon. Harrow. Oxford. Eel Brook Common. Paddington station. Letchworth. Bradwell defuelled. Central congestioncontrol zone. The London Ring Main. Doubledecker buses. Elizabeth. Greenbelt. 1666 Great Fire. (2001 pop.; 2000 image) (Davis 1976, Munton 1983, Gilbert 1991, Turner 1992, Bartuska 1994, Parsons and Schuyler 2000, Ishikawa 2001, Howe 2002, Hall 2002)

Mexico City (Mexico)

Toluca. Cuernavaca. Pueblo. Pachuca. Sierra Nevada. Ajusco. Texmelucan. Volcan Popocatepetl. Volcan Iztaccihuatl. Guadaloupe Zaragoza. Teotihuacan. Calpulalpan. Apan. Laguna Tecocomulco. Tula. Ecatepec. Coacalco. Villa de Carbon. Cuantlan. Tlanepantla Ocampo. Jilotepec de Molina. Xochimilco. Mina Vieja. Santa Cruz. Contreras. Milpa Alta. San Juan Ixtayopan. Cerro Cervantes. Santa Barbara. Barranca Grande. Llano Grande. La Finca. Parque A. de Humboldt. Cerro El Coyote. (2002 pop.; 2000 image) (Rapoport 1993, Losada et al. 1998, Pezzoli 1998, Hall 2002)

Moscow (Russia)

Obninsk. Moskva River. Sergiev Posad. Stupino. Klin. Pokrov. Elektostal. Losiny Ostrov National Park. Vodokhraqnilishche. Dmitrov. Izmaylovsky Lesopark. Troize-Sergieva Lavra. Kremlin. Klimkinskoe. Nudol. Krasnobogatyrskaya. Mow. Bittsa. Balashikha. Ruza. Biryulevsky Dendropark. Archangelskoe. Domodedova. Oka River. Mytisci. Cehov. Ukraine to south. Belarus to west. Finland and Barents Sea to north. Two-lane outer ring road. Weekend dachas. (2002 pop.; 2002 image) (Barker and Sutcliffe 1993)

Place-name synopses of the regions Nairobi (Kenya)

Ngong Hills. Mt. Kinango. Masai Gorge. Kabira. Nyeri. Murang’a. Kikuyu. Athi River. Dandora. Saba Saba. Gitutu. Machakos. Thika. Lake Naivasha. Suswa. Gilgil. Hyrax Hill. Soda Lake. Magadi. Olorgasailie. Konza. Fourteen Falls. Santamor Halt. Nairobi National Park. Kikoro. Kithimani. Embu. Kipipiri. Rift Valley to west. Mt. Kenya to north. Mt. Kilimanjaro and Tanzania to south. Indian Ocean to east. (1999 pop.; 2000 image) Nantes (France)

The Loire. Lac de Grand-Lieu. Canal de Nantes a Brest. Etang de Pin. La Chapelle-Basse-Mer. La Montagne. Paimboeuf. Etang du Grand Moulin. Charbonnieres. The Atlantic. Cote de Jade. Pont de St-Nazaire. La Pommeraye. St-Mars. Foret d’Ombres. Le Pin. Menhirs des Loueres. Missillac. Ste-Anne. Maine Riviere. Chateau des Ducs de Bretagne. La Grande Haie. Notre-Dame-des-Landes. Piqueniques. (1999 pop.; 2001 image) (Pauleit et al. 2005) Ottawa (Canada)

Ontario. Quebec. Ottawa River. Rideau Locks. Hull. La Peche. Gloucester. Algonquin. Rockland. Parc de la Gatineau. Buckingham. Aylmer. Carleton Place. Brockville. St. Andrews. Lac Simon. Cornwall. Kilmamock. Papineau-Labelle. Moose Creek. Fitzroy Park. New Dublin. Tincas. Smith’s Falls. Ogdensburg. Limoges. Stittsville. Brightside. Pike Lake. Fort Coulonge. Quebec to north. Montreal to east. New York and USA to south. Sewage-lagoon birds. Greenbelt and greenways. (2001 pop.; 2001 image) (Hough 2004, Billington and Tozer 1977) Philadelphia (USA)

The Schuylkill. Delaware River. Valley Forge. Pine Barrens. New Jersey. Levittown. Camden. New Hope. Bristol. Chester. Chestnut Street. Main Line. Haverford College. Bryn Mawr. Swedesboro. Mullica River. George School. Fort Dix/McGuire AFB. Pennsylvania Turnpike. Liberty Bell. Wilmington to southwest. New York to northeast. Quaker William Penn atop City Hall. Benjamin Franklin’s university. Paddling through cedar swamp magic. (2000 pop.; 2002 image) (McHarg 1969, Forman 1979a, Pinelands Commission 1980a) Portland (USA)

Oregon City. Columbia River. Bonneville Dam. Willamette. Capital Salem. Trojan Nuclear. St. Helens. Timber. Scappoose. Vancouver. Washington State. Beaverton. Mt. Hood. Turner. Silverton. Scotts Mills. Elk Lake. Mt. Jefferson. Bull Run. Woodburn. Zigzag. Cedar Hills. Rhododendron. Cougar. Milwaukie.

131

132

Thirty-eight urban regions Orenco Station. Happy Valley. Forest Park. The Paciﬁc to west. Urban growth boundary. Lewis and Clark. (2000 pop.; 2000 image) (Platt et al. 1994, Diamond and Noonan 1996, Benﬁeld et al. 1999, Houck and Cody 2000, Calthorpe and Fulton 2001, Hulse et al. 2002, Avin and Bayer 2003, Ozawa 2004, Irazabal 2005) Rahimyar Khan (Pakistan)

Indus River ﬂoodplain. Sadiquiped. Ubauro. Punjab’s south end. Maumubarik. Bahawalpur. Cholistan Desert. Rajanpur. Mithankot. Allahabad. Siri natural gas. Khanpur. Liaquatpur. Thar Desert. Ghani Goth. Sadiqabad. Kashamor. Derawar Fort. Rojhan. Kandhkat. Jhil Marav. Loti. Daharki. Khan Bela. Jamaluddinwali. Kot Samaba. India to southeast. Karachi-Lahore railway. Mandi towns. Town Hall’s tower. Camels. Desert crossing. Fish-migration ladders. (1998 pop., adjusted to year 2000 using 5 % annual growth rate; 2000 image) (Masud-Ul-Hasan c. 1965) Rome (Italy)

Mediterranean. Tirreno Sea. Tiber River. Colosseo. Ostia. Tivoli Gardens. Teatro Adriano. Albani Hills. Lago di Bracciano. Cisterna di Latina. Frosinone. Roccamassima. Grotta del Pianoros. Leonardo da Vinci Airport. Tarquinia. Civitavecchia. The Vatican. Ladipoli. Vigna di Valle. Macchia della Manziana. Castel S. Elia. Viterbo. Avezzano. Campo Felice. Cava di Pietre. Mola di Bassano. Villa S. Giavanni. Allumiere. Gran Sasso d’Italia. L’Aquila. Rieti. Campagna Romana. Beaches. Roman roads. (2001 pop.; 2001 image) (Barker and Sutcliffe 1993, Blondel and Aronson 1999) Samarinda (Indonesia)

Borneo. East Kalimantan. Pulau Terentang. Balikpapan. Bontag port. Ayu, Pemarung. Mahakam River. Samboja. Tg. Bayur. Santan. Muarajawa. Teggarong tourism. Sepasu. Danau Melintang. Kutai National Park. Klampo. Sengata. Bangsalsepulun. Equator. Lohjanan. Pandang Luwai Reserve. Java and Java Sea to south. Sulawesi (Celebes) to east. Malaysia and South China Sea to northwest. Rainforest logging outlet. River bridge. Multi-channel delta. Mangrove swamps. Offshore oil ﬁeld. (1990 pop., adjusted to year 2000 using 5 % annual growth rate; 2001 image) (Lawrence 2004) San Diego/Tijuana (USA/Mexico)

Oceanside. Rio Tia Juana. Rosarito. The Paciﬁc. Bronco Flats. Bear Canyon. El Mezquito. Escondido. Thing Valley. Ruidoso. Guadalupe. Mission Beach. Ecological Reserve. Temecula. Neji. Colorado River water. Palomar Mt. Ramona. Cayapaipe Indian Reservation. Lake Henshaw. El Descanso. El Condor. Barbara Terrace.

Place-name synopses of the regions Camp Pendleton. Poptla. Oak Grove. Baja to south. Imperial Valley and Arizona to east. Los Angeles to northwest. Chaparral gnatcatcher. Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan. Wildﬁre. TOD. Water sources. (2000 pop.; 2000 image) (Soule 1991, Beatley 1994, Bloom and McCrary 1996, Swenson and Franklin 2000, DiGregoria et al. 2006) Santiago (Chile)

The Andes. Vina del Mar. Los Condos. Maipu. Rancagua. San Antonio. Valparaiso. Colina Hot Springs. Conchali. Acudo Lake. Rio Maipo. Cerro San Cristobal. Penaﬂor. Paine. Laguna Negra. Naturaleza Yerba Loca. Melipilla. Nos. Park La Campana. Pomaire. 6070 m Cerro Juncal. Esmeralda. Valle Allegre. Tiltil. Rio Clarillo Park. Tierras Blancas. Santa Sara. Pueblo Hundido. Villa Seca. La Rana. El Melocoton. Paciﬁc to west. Argentina to east. Skiing and beaches. (2002 pop.; 1999 image) (Atkinson et al. 1999, Simmonds and Hack 2000) Sapporo (Japan)

Promenade O-dori. Tokei-dai Clocktower. Sea of Japan. Tomakomai. Muroran. Bibai. Yoichi Dake. Lake Toya. Lake Shikotsu. Otaru. Takikawa. Yubari. Rumoi. Ainu Village. Hiroshima. Shakitan Peninsula. Noboribetsu Spa. Chitose Gawa. Niseko skiing. Ski Jump Hill. Atsubetsuku. Nopporo Forest Park. Hassoan Teahouse. Shokanbeetsu. Ishikari. Asahikawa to north. Japan’s big northern island. Ice sculptures extravaganza. (2002 pop.; 1999 image) Seoul (South Korea)

Goyang. Bucheon. Anyang. Uijeongbu. Guangju. Incheon. Demilitarized Zone. North Korea. Seongnam. Gunpo. Chugyop-san. Yellow Sea. Asan Bay. Kanghula Island. Namhan River. Soyang Lake. Mt. Ch’iaksan National Park. Concentrated militaries. Greenbelt skylines. Dust from Inner Mongolia. Mountain and rice valleys. (2000 pop.; 2001 image) (Im 1992, Park and Lee 2000, Song and Jin 2002, Hong et al. 2003, Lee et al. 2005, Bengston and Youn 2006) Stockholm (Sweden)

Saltsjon. Kronobergs-Parken. Vallhallavegen. Strandvagen. Tennisstadion. Norra Station. Ringvagen. Gamla Stan. Kungliga Slottet. Lake Malaren. The Archipelago. Gustavsberg. Boo. Katrinaholm. Riddersholm. Upplands-Vasby. Norrfjarden. The Baltic and Finland to east. Poland to south. Norway to west. Green wedges. Boats and ﬁshermen. Norway spruce and Scots pine. Moose. (2002 pop.; 2000 image) (Bolund and Hunhammar 1999, Mortberg 2001, Hall 2002, Elmqvist et al. 2004, Clark 2006)

133

134

Thirty-eight urban regions Tegucigalpa (Honduras)

Golfo de Fonseca. Danli. Comayagua. Comayaguela. Parque Nacional La Tigra. Parque El Obrero. Ojojona. Escuela Agricola Panamericana. El Sauce. Cerro Grande. Rio Hondo. La Cuesta No. 2. Talanga. Mata de Platano. Santa Ana. Sabanagrande. El Paraiso. Montana El Chile. Las Mesas. El Oro. Rio Choluteca. El Uyuca. San Antonio. Angalteca. Paciﬁc, Nicaragua, and El Salvador to south. Caribbean to north. Romantic Parque La Leona. (2001 pop.; 1999 image) Tehran (Iran)

Karaj. Namak Lake. Alborz Mountains. Kuh-e Damavand volcano at 5601 m. Qom. Garmsar. Varamin. Lar River Reservoir. Eslamshar. Saran. Baqer Abad. Shemshak. Rey. Shariyar. Bumehen. Dasht-e-Kavir Desert. Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan, and Armenia to north. Mountain ridges. Salt ﬂats. Irrigating the blooming desert. Palm shade. (1999 pop.; 2000 image) Ulaanbaatar (Mongolia)

Ulan Bator. Druumod. Chentejn. Nuruu. Altanbulag. Darhan. Tuul Gol. Jargalant. Mandal. Ihsuuj. Tov. Nalayh. Zuunmod. Assait Hairhan. Ikh Khorig. North Gobi Desert. Kerulen River to east. Chinese Inner Mongolia to south. Water that ends up in Lake Baikal of Siberian Russia to north. Tundra-covered mountain ridges. Rushing rivers. Felt walls (yerts) on the move. Zud. Dung for life. Wolves. Camels. Cold. Grassland. (2000 pop.; 2001 image)

Broad patterns of the urban-region set The 38 cities are no random sample of the world’s cities. Nor are they explicitly a representative sample. The selection process mainly eliminated cities near other major cities. It eliminated outliers (e.g., Rio de Janeiro, Miami, Johannesburg, New York, Venice) whose patterns might not readily extrapolate to other cities. Putting those two constraints aside, the process did choose a range of at least somewhat representative urban regions worldwide so that results should be widely extrapolable. As still more regions are analyzed, the central tendencies and variability will become clearer. Before dissecting the regions individually and comparing them, a brief overview of the total set is useful. City populations ranged from c. 260 000 (Rahimyar Khan) to 11 million (Beijing), with a fairly even distribution in multiples-of-two size classes (0.25--0.5, 0.5--1, 1--2 million, etc.) (Table 5.1). The six broad geographic areas (somewhat similar to continents) each has ﬁve to eight urban regions represented. Thirty-one nations are represented. Latitudes range from 56 ◦ N (Moscow) across the equator (Nairobi, Samarinda) to 35 ◦ S

1 527 000

278 000

Barcelona (Spain)

Nantes (France)

1 518 000

774 000

616 000

529 000

416 000

SanDiego/Tijuana

Philadelphia (USA)

Ottawa (Canada)

Edmonton (Canada)

Portland (USA)

Atlanta (USA)

368 000

Iquitos (Peru)

Brasilia (Brazil)

820 000

2 051 000

Santiago (Chile)

Tegucigalpa (Honduras)

8 590 000

4 668 000

Mexico City (Mexico)

LATIN AMERICA

(USA/Mexico)

2 896 000

2 373 000

Chicago (USA)

NORTH AMERICA

1 922 000

1 850 000

2 733 000

Rome (Italy)

Stockholm (Sweden)

3 388 000

Bucharest (Romania)

7 127 000

Berlin (Germany)

of city

London (UK)

EUROPE

City (Nation)

Population

4S

14N

16S

33S

19N

34N

46N

54N

45N

40N

33N

42N

47N

41N

59N

44N

42N

52N

116

1004

1061

529

2231

307

9

656

79

2

4

185

30

95

44

82

115

50

5

(m)

(◦ )

52N

Elevation

Latitude

25

20

21.3

14.1

15.6

16.1

12.8

2.6

6.3

12.4

17.2

10.6

12.3

15.7

6.1

10.9

16.1

9.4

11.1

(◦C)

Temperature

274

94

154

36?

58

120

101

44

73

104

25

84

79

60

57

58

65

56

59

(cm)

Precipitation

68

51

248

219

287

707

325

176

133

538

354

748

87

97

183

105

155

221

381

(km)

perimeter

Metro

85

81

478

525

1 606

3 133

1 325

550

372

2 459

1 138

3 993

171

219

500

286

388

905

1 672

(km2 )

Metro area

0.8

0.63

0.52

0.42

0.18

0.23

0.25

0.32

0.36

0.22

0.31

0.19

0.51

0.44

0.37

0.37

0.4

0.24

0.23

ratio

Metro P/A

Table 5.1 Statistics for the thirty-eight urban regions analyzed. P/A = perimeter to area; L/W = length to width. See Figure 5.1 map.

5.8

1.3

2

1.3

1.5

1.1

1

1.3

1.8

1.4

1.7

1.4

1.3

1.6

1.7

1.2

1.6

1.9

1.5

ratio

(cont.)

Metro L/W

1 083 000

Bamako (Mali)

578 000 554 000

Erzurum (Turkey)

Kagoshima (Japan)

588 000 546 000 309 000 258 000

Samarinda (Indonesia)

Canberra (Australia)

Rahimyar Khan (Pakistan)

Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia)

Cuttack (India)

6 355 000

1 379 000

Bangkok (Thailand)

AUSTRALIA

SOUTH ASIA to

760 000

1 823 000

Sapporo (Japan)

Ulaanbaatar (Mongolia)

9 900 000

6 935 000

Tehran (Iran)

10 360 000

Seoul (Korea)

10 820 000

Moscow (Russia)

263 000

Beijing (P. R. China)

WEST to EAST ASIA

Abeche (Chad)

Africa)

332 000

2 143 000

East London (South

6 789 000

Nairobi (Kenya)

of city

Population

Cairo (Egypt)

AFRICA

City (Nation)

Table 5.1 (cont.)

29N

35S

0S

20N

3N

14N

32N

40N

48N

43N

36N

38N

56N

40N

15N

33S

13N

1S

82

558

230

15

22

2

5

1757

1155

17

1217

34

154

52

295

125

527

1657

116

(m)

(◦ )

30N

Elevation

Latitude

?

13.3

27?

?

26.6

27.6

16.6

10?

58

250?

152

237

140

224

44

19

6

113

8.2

25

134

63

62

50?

81

112

87

3

(cm)

Precipitation

−2.2

16.5

12.2

4.4

11.8

27.9

18.6

28.1

19.6

21.1

(◦C)

Temperature

29

113

34

55

331

195

77

31

62

165

196

252

318

230

21

59

87

82

193

(km)

perimeter

Metro

26

240

41

72

871

751

113

33

80

370

575

971

1 111

1 243

24

85

201

159

543

(km2 )

Metro area

1.12

0.47

0.83

0.76

0.38

0.26

0.68

0.94

0.78

0.45

0.34

0.26

0.29

0.19

0.88

0.69

0.43

0.52

0.36

ratio

Metro P/A

1.8

2.2

2.3

2.2

1.6

1.7

2.8

2

3.2

1.5

1.4

2.1

1.1

1.4

1.7

1.8

1.8

2.1

2.1

ratio

Metro L/W

Broad patterns of the urban-region set (Canberra), though, like land masses, they are skewed to the northern hemisphere. Elevations range from nearly sea level (Bangkok, Philadelphia) to 2200 m (Mexico City); the median is 116 m. Average annual temperature ranges from −2 ◦ C (Ulaanbaatar) to 28 ◦ C (Bamako), while nearly 60 % of the cities fall between 10 and 20 ◦ C. Average annual precipitation ranges from 3 cm (Cairo) to 274 cm (Iquitos); only ﬁve places record <50 cm and only four places >155 cm. Latitude and elevation are central determinants of average temperature and precipitation, which primarily determine the natural vegetation type for a region. Of the world’s major vegetation types, no cities chosen are in tundra or boreal forest (taiga). Cities are reasonably well distributed over the six major vegetation types present: six in boreal--temperate transition forest (Berlin, Stockholm, Ottawa, Portland, Moscow, Sapporo); eight in temperate deciduous-evergreen forest (London, Nantes, Chicago, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Beijing, Seoul, Kagoshima); ﬁve in tropical rainforest (Iquitos, Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, Cuttack, Samarinda); ﬁve in Mediterranean-type woodland (Rome, Barcelona, San Diego/Tijuana, Santiago, East London); six in savanna-woodland (Mexico City, Brasilia, Tegucigalpa, Nairobi, Bamako, Canberra); ﬁve in grassland (Bucharest, Edmonton, Abeche, Ulaanbaatar, Erzurum); and three in desert-woodland (Cairo, Tehran, Rahimyar Khan). City location relative to water bodies is particularly important in urban regions. Fourteen cities are on a single major river, and another four are on the intersection of major rivers. Four cities are on the shore of a lake or reservoir, one associated with a river and one with a sea/saltwater bay. Four are on a seacoast and one on a saltwater bay. Ten cities have no adjacent major surface water body, though all have streams or seasonal water ﬂows in gullies. Again a wide range of city and water-body locations is included. Cities were chosen so their urban region would be minimally affected by another nearby city. Thus 13 cities have no nearby major city (>250 000 population) within 200 km, and another 19 have no city within 100 km. In one case (Kagoshima) the nearest major city is smaller in population and 90 km away. In the other ﬁve cases (Mexico City, Cairo, Seoul, Tehran, Stockholm) with closer nearby cities (20--80 km distant), the other major city is much smaller. The perimeter and area of metropolitan areas vary from tiny Abeche to huge Chicago (Table 5.1). In general, US cities have the largest metro areas, both in perimeter and area, though the much-more-populous London and Moscow have long perimeters, and London, Moscow, Mexico City, and Beijing have large areas. The perimeter-to-area ratio of metropolitan areas tends to be inversely proportional to city population size. Seventy percent of the metro areas have a lengthto-width ratio <2; only Iquitos at 5.8 is very long and narrow. In effect a broad cross-section of geography, climate, land use and culture is represented in this set of 38 urban regions. The next two chapters will examine these regions in some depth to discover valuable patterns and principles.

137

6

Nature, food, and water

The color maps of 38 urban regions represent a treasure chest for the curious. Opening this chest to discover intriguing and important patterns is the delight of this chapter and the next. Here we look rather directly for patterns in the areas of nature, food, and water. In chapter 5 we explore built systems, built areas, and whole regions to ﬁnd signiﬁcant natural systems and human use patterns. Although nature, food and water are separated for sequential presentation purposes, clearly broad overlaps exist among the three categories. Nature often thrives both in food-producing areas and in water-bodies (Figure 6.1). Food products are harvested from both natural vegetation and aquatic ecosystems. And water is often abundant in both natural areas and farmland. Still, from a spatial planning perspective, providing for viable natural-vegetation areas, agricultural landscapes, and streams/rivers/lakes/aquifers/marine areas is fundamental. With the treasure chest open before us, ﬁrst we must consider how to ﬁnd the nuggets. How do we sort through the mass of material and decipher key patterns. We are only looking for major patterns or results. Minor results, as well as major ones that we miss, will await discovery by others. So we start by brieﬂy considering the important spatial-analysis process used to reveal the nuggets.

Spatial analysis for patterns Intelligence agencies know that if you know what you are looking for, the chance of ﬁnding it increases enormously. That does not work here because, as a scientist, I attempt to put my views and wishes aside, and let the patterns appear through objective analysis.

138

Spatial analysis for patterns

Figure 6.1 Nature, food, and water as overlapping concepts and interacting spaces on land. Forest, crop ﬁelds, and a 20 hectare (50 acre) dammed reservoir are linked by ﬂows and movements of energy, water- and air-borne materials, animals, and people. Tennessee, USA. Photo courtesy of US Department of Agriculture.

Still, lots of possible approaches exist. Perhaps directly measuring the diverse parameters of natural systems and human uses in all urban regions using consistent, rigorous methods would be optimal. Then multivariate statistics and other detailed quantitative analytic methods could be used. Alas, I would get old before the measurements were done. A second choice might be to directly measure some parameters, and obtain dependable peer-reviewed data for the rest. Unfortunately few such data exist, and at the current rate I would have to sit around for centuries. As suggested in the previous chapter, a different approach was used. The best data I could ﬁnd were located from articles, books, and maps, and additional information was absorbed from consultations with knowledgeable persons. Data from computer searches were rarely included (due to the prevalence

139

140

Nature, food, and water of data-source agendas, ephemerality of some data, and especially the scarcity of independent peer review needed for dependable scholarship). Large detailed satellite images (30 m cell size) of urban regions were printed. Number, type, distance, form, and area of objects were directly measured with ruler and planimeter on the images by a single observer. In almost all cases each type of measurement was made on all 38 urban regions within a few days. Spatial measurements for patterns in this chapter required an average of 20 minutes per urban region, and those for Chapter 7 required 35 min. To evaluate observer consistency or variability, periodically ﬁve repeated measurements of the same attribute were made. Compared with the ﬁrst measurement, the average of the ﬁve measurements varied on average 3 % (range 0--9 %), suggesting that this methodology produced reasonable consistency. The degree of variability and resulting conﬁdence in data and measurements can be further understood from the following examples. Population data for urban regions were for slightly different years (1999 to 2002) and probably differed in quality and area coverage (Chapter 5). Perimeter and surface area measurements of the metropolitan areas depend on determining cut off points for house-lot density and width of greenspace, plus their consistent application. Perhaps, on average, 5 % of a metro-area perimeter was near the cut-off points, with the percentage ranging from about 0--10 % over the set of regions. Attributes such as rivers, lakes, reservoirs, airports, shipping/ferry ports, and large mine sites were clear on the images, so conﬁdence in the associated numbers was very high. Some biodiversity sites and recreation/tourism sites, for example, were clear on an image, but many were not, and thus had to be marked in approximate locations. In addition, considerable interpretation was necessary in estimating whether certain sites had the appropriate attributes (rare species or rare natural community, signiﬁcant recreation or tourism from the city in a single day), in locating a site on the image, and in deciding whether the site was a major one to be included. In another case, urban region boundaries, which were invisible on the images, were mainly delineated using six variables (Chapter 5), with different variables being primary in different portions of a boundary. On the other hand, many measurements varied negligibly, such as number of marked objects and distance between two points. These examples attempt to provide insight into the degree of conﬁdence appropriate for different portions of the extensive information base underlying the color maps and their spatial analyses. In essence, most of the patterns and results highlighted in these two chapters were based on data and measurements with the high degree of conﬁdence quite normal in science. In cases where more variability existed in the measurements

Spatial analysis for patterns or data, a conservative approach of only pinpointing the clearest major results was taken. With this approach, errors discovered or new data added are unlikely to have a signiﬁcant effect on the results highlighted, though of course caution in interpretation is always warranted. Many minor results, and even major results not pinpointed, are evident in the ﬁgures and color maps, and are likely to be discovered and highlighted in the future. A spatial-analysis technique using landscape metrics bears mention (Fortin 1999, Klopatek and Gardner 1999, Leitao et al. 2006), though it was not used here. Landscape metrics are measures (and equations) that quantify spatial attributes of a large area, such as connectivity, patch density, total interior habitat, boundary length or density, and association of types of objects. The beauty of these is that important ecological characteristics are known to correlate with spatial attributes. These ecological characteristics at the landscape scale include interior species, large-home-range species, aquifers, wildﬁre hazard, wildlife movement routes, animal dispersal, species-rich sites, stream-network ﬂows, ﬁsh migration, and so forth. Thus a particular quantitative level for a spatial attribute is an indicator or surrogate for conditions of an ecological characteristic on the land. The idea of spatial attributes and ecological characteristics will be used periodically in this book. Landscape metrics do not replace direct, detailed measurements of ecological characteristics at the landscape scale that may be time consuming, or experiments that may be impossible. Rather, because of the previously documented relationship between spatial attributes and ecological characteristics, the landscape metrics may represent a useful handle to ecological understanding and planning of landscapes. In landscape ecology the landscape is a kilometers-wide area over which local land uses and ecosystems are repeated in similar form (Forman 1995). For operational convenience in analyzing urban regions, the landscape concept is narrowed slightly and refers to a compact (<2:1 length-to-width ratio) area of >100 km2 with repeated internal heterogeneity, such as a cropland landscape or a wooded landscape. The ﬁrst section below, ‘‘nature in urban regions,” will emphasize natural vegetation areas and connectivity for species movement. The second section, ‘‘Food in urban regions” will focus on cropland areas, including regional diversity and stability. The third section, ‘‘Water in urban regions” will highlight water bodies and areas that affect them. These are explored outside the metropolitan area, that is, in the surrounding urban-region ring. Thirty-seven major patterns and results emerged from spatially analyzing the 38 urban regions. These are presented in the nature-in-urban-regions section as

141

142

Nature, food, and water N1, N2, N3, etc., food section as F1, etc., and water section as W1, etc. Brief elucidations under each result may: (1) discuss or interpret it; (2) illustrate its implications ecologically or for society; and (3) identify useful approaches or solutions for land planning, protection, restoration, and other objectives. Some solutions are labeled as priority and some as high priority, relative to the total set of patterns presented in Chapters 6 and 7. Each point in the following graphs represents an urban region. Unlike the usual scientiﬁc graphs that focus on and highlight close correlations between variables, axes here are chosen to maximize information presentation and to spread out the data in order to detect variability and contrasting patterns. Thus most insights and results emerge from examining the four sections or corners in a graph.

Nature in urban regions Presence of natural patches and landscapes

[N1] At least three scales of natural area in urban regions can be readily and usefully recognized: (1) natural landscapes >100 km2 ; (2) large natural patches, i.e., the largest widely distributed ones, which average about 16 km2 ; and (3) small wooded patches averaging 0.4 km2 , but mostly <0.2 km2 (<200 ha) (Figures 6.3 and 6.10). These three size categories emerged qualitatively from extensive perusal of large (c. 70 × 100 cm) images of dozens of urban regions. Geographers, landscape ecologists, and others have quantitative techniques to determine the frequency of patch sizes as spatial scale changes (Milne 1991a, 1991b, Klopatek and Gardner 1999). Results often show a series of peak patch-size frequencies; the above three scales seem to correspond to three peaks. The natural-landscape scale probably mainly reﬂects the geomorphology of, e.g., hilly areas, mountain ridges, and major valleys. The large-natural-patch scale may reﬂect the combination of geomorphic features, soil types, and human activities on the land. The smallwooded-patch scale probably reﬂects farmers’ crop-production practices, as these patches are overwhelmingly in cropland areas. Natural landscapes are of a size to protect aquifers, large-home-range species, and so forth (Forman 1995). The large patches are generally sufﬁcient to protect populations of some interior species, and serve as sources of these species for the surrounding land. The small natural patches may support isolated rare plants, but are especially useful as stepping stones for species movement across a cropland landscape.

[N2] No natural landscapes are present in 8 %, and no wooded landscapes are present in 16 %, of the regions (Figures 6.2 and 6.3).

Sea

Numerous Compact Linear

Bam+ Nai+ Abe•

Kua+

Medium Linear

Nan•

Compact

Phil+

Linear Few

Teh

Lon* Cai* Chi+ Buc+ Erz• Rah•

0

Max * Bar+ Teg•

* Bra+

Eas•

Edm• Atl•

Keg•

Sto+ Iqu• Sdt+ Ott+

Ula• Por• San*

Ban*

Compact

Abundance and shapes of small woods close to wooded landscapes

Nature in urban regions

Sap+

Cut•

* Bei*

Rom+ Can•

Mos*

2 4 6 8 10 Number of wooded landscapes in urban region

12

Figure 6.2 Abundance and shape of small woods relative to number of wooded landscapes in an urban region. Wooded landscapes (forest or woodland) are > 100 km2 and compact in shape. Small woods within 5 km of a wooded landscape average 0.4 km2 , but are mostly <0.2 km2 (<200 ha). Relative abundance (few, medium, numerous) is estimated for small woods <5 km from a wooded landscape. ∗

= city population >4 million (‘‘large”); + = 1 to 4 million (‘‘medium”);

•

= 250 000 to 1 million (‘‘small”). City abbreviations: Abe (Abeche, Chad); Atl

(Atlanta, USA); Bam (Bamako, Mali); Ban (Bangkok, Thailand); Bar (Barcelona, Spain); Bei (Beijing, China); Ber (Berlin, Germany); Bra (Brasilia, Brazil); Buc (Bucharest, Romania); Cai (Cairo, Egypt); Can (Canberra, Australia); Chi (Chicago, USA); Cut (Cuttack, India); Eas (East London, South Africa); Edm (Edmonton, Canada); Erz (Erzurum, Turkey); Iqu (Iquitos, Peru); Kag (Kagoshima, Japan); Kua (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia); Lon (London, United Kingdom); Mex (Mexico City, Mexico); Mos (Moscow, Russia); Nai (Nairobi, Kenya); Nan (Nantes, France); Ott (Ottawa, Canada); Phi (Philadelphia, USA); Por (Portland, USA); Rah (Rahimyar Khan, Pakistan); Rom (Rome, Italy); Sam (Samarinda, Indonesia); Sdt (San Diego/Tijuana, USA/Mexico); San (Santiago, Chile); Sap (Sapporo, Japan); Seo (Seoul, South Korea); Sto (Stockholm, Sweden); Teg (Tegucigalpa, Honduras); Teh (Tehran, Iran); Ula (Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia). See Table 5.1 and Chapter 5 for further urban region information.

143

Nature, food, and water 50

(56)

Cut•

Median area of 20 largest, widley distributed wooded patches (km2)

144

Max

*

40 Mos*

Eas•

Rom+

Bar+

30

Abe•

Bra+ Can•

Seo*

Ott+

Buc+

20 Atl•

10 Chi+

Kua+ Phil+ Nan•

* Rah•

0

2

Teh * Ban* Edm•

Lon

0

San*

Erz• Cai*

Por• Bei*

Nai+

Teg•

Sto+

Sdt+

Ula• Iqu•

Kag•

Ber+

Sap+

4 6 8 10 Number of natural landscapes in urban region

12

Figure 6.3 Size of large wooded patches relative to number of natural landscapes. Natural landscapes are >100 km2 and compact in shape. All landscapes are wooded except for: grassland in Erzurum urban region; grassland and wooded in Nairobi, Ulaanbaatar, and Abeche; desert in Cairo and Rahimyar Khan; desert and wooded in Tehran. Patch size is the median estimated area of the 20 largest wooded patches (<100 km2 ) widely distributed across agricultural and built areas (i.e., where clustered, only one patch from the cluster is included). 10 km2 = 3.9 mi2 . See Chapter 5 for natural vegetation types, and Figure 6.2 caption for city information.

This suggests problems for aquifer protection, large-home-range species, and for the viability and movement of key forest/woodland species. Wooded landscapes also are especially important for diverse recreational uses. In these urban regions a high priority is to reestablish natural landscapes, especially wooded ones, by reconnecting pairs or clusters of large natural patches.

[N3] Eighty-two percent of the regions have natural landscapes, and 71% has wooded landscapes, near the city (<50 km from city center); 11% and 13%, respectively, only have more distant ones (Color Figures 2--39).

Nature in urban regions Natural and wooded landscapes close to a metropolitan area are subject to diverse and often intense human impacts, which are likely to increase as urbanization proceeds. Thus ﬂood-control beneﬁts, nature conservation, cooling sources reducing urban heat-island effects, and so forth in these important landscapes represent a particular challenge. Indeed wooded landscapes are especially valuable for diverse recreational activities in proximity to a city. In the outer portion of an urban-region ring, natural and wooded landscapes are normally less subject to degradation, and hence are a particularly good investment for maintaining aquifer/water-supply protection, nature conservation, clean surface water bodies, and many other environmental and socioeconomic beneﬁts for society.

[N4] For half the regions, the largest natural patches present (outside of natural landscapes) are relatively small (median sizes 0--12 km2 ) (Figure 6.3). This suggests lower biodiversity, lower connectivity, more degraded habitat, and more risk of patch shrinkage and disappearance, than if these ecologically critical patches were larger. Stability related to number and types of natural landscapes

[N5] Most regions have 3--12 natural landscapes, 8 % have only one or two, and another 8 % have no natural landscapes remaining (Figure 6.3). A low number indicates little stability plus high risk for the many ecological values of large natural landscapes. Also few natural landscapes suggest some diversity of types may be present, but little stability exists due to the low redundancy of types. A higher number of natural landscapes should provide both a diversity of types and reasonable stability. Regional connectivity for nature

[N6] A fully connected emerald network of natural landscapes, with no major gaps separating them, is present in a quarter of the urban regions (Color Figures 1--39). The emerald network is one of the most important patterns in this book. Effectively it is a set of large natural interconnected patches, in this case natural landscapes of >100 km2 . These landscapes are large enough to provide the range of large-patch beneﬁts, such as protection of aquifers, large-home-range species, and viable populations of interior species. Also they are numerous enough to provide some diversity and some redundancy of types, and therefore stability. The connections or corridors permit effective movement of species and walkers throughout the network. Multidirectional corridors for movement also provide stability, for example, in the face of global climate change or the spread of a

145

Nature, food, and water 2.0

Elongation of metro area between nearby similar landscapes (length to width ratio)

146

Bra+ Ber+

1.8 Sto+ 1.6 Sap+

Mex

*

1.4

Phi+

1.2

1.0 0

Por• 500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Area of metropolitan area (km2) Figure 6.4 Elongation of metropolitan area between similar landscapes relative to size of metropolitan area. Metro-area size is measured with a planimeter on large 1:200 000 satellite images. Landscapes are >100 km2 and compact in shape; all are wooded except Philadelphia which is agricultural. Long axis of metro-area separates the landscapes. 100 km2 = 38.6 mi2 . See Chapter 5 for natural vegetation types, and Figure 6.2 caption for city information.

disease or pest. Rather than a group of patches, the emerald network functions as a system of patches and corridors for both biodiversity and recreation. Protecting the connections, the most vulnerable places, is especially important. A viable emerald network is a key long-term high priority objective for many regions.

[N7] In a sixth of the regions, an elongated metropolitan area lies between two nearby similar, usually wooded, landscapes (Figure 6.4). In these cases the metro area doubtless serves as a signiﬁcant barrier to regional species movement between the nearby landscapes (Pauleit et al. 2005). In one case (Philadelphia), the metro area separates cropland landscapes containing scattered small woods, and across which many forest birds may readily move (Knaapen et al. 1992, Forman 1995). The only really long and narrow metro area is Iquitos, which, however, is nearly surrounded by rainforest. A dual approach to overcoming the barrier effect of elongated metro areas may be best. Strengthening or creating rows of parks or linear greenspaces across the metro area would help reconnect the landscapes on opposite sides. Establishing a large elongated greenspace at each end of the metro area, and

Nature in urban regions perpendicular to it, would provide connectivity for the future as development spreads outward.

[N8] Small woods are common in open areas close to the forest/woodland landscapes in two-thirds of the regions; however, in a sixth of the regions few small woods are present around wooded landscapes (Figure 6.2). The presence of small woods around a large natural patch not only enhances the viability and persistence of key interior species, but increases connectivity for regional species movement (Opdam and Schotman 1987, Opdam et al. 1992, Forman 1995). The basic concept probably also applies here to whole landscapes, though less strongly so. Many of the regions are satisfactory for this pattern, though in a small number, increasing the density of small natural patches near natural landscapes should improve ecological conditions (see Figure 2.2).

[N9] In about half the regions with abundant small woods around wooded landscapes, the woods are mainly linear (Figure 6.2). This pattern provides greater connectivity value as well as, usually, streamcorridor protection beneﬁts. Except along streams, in habitat restoration it is not worthwhile elongating woods, because too much of the wooded area is lowerquality forest-edge habitat. It would be better to increase the size or number of patches. Connections and gaps as strategic points

[N10] Most regions have few connections and gaps between natural landscapes, mainly because few natural landscapes are present (Figure 6.5). In these cases connections are key strategic points for land protection, and gaps are key points for land restoration, particularly in the outer urban-region ring (where patterns are more likely to persist in the face of urbanization). Where natural landscapes are widely separated, establishing stepping stones between them may be desirable. Creating whole new natural landscapes, e.g., by interconnecting clusters of natural patches, would be quite signiﬁcant.

[N11] Most regions have more major gaps than connections between natural landscapes (Figure 6.5). This indicates poor regional connectivity for species movement. Restoring corridors that reconnect the natural landscapes, especially in the outer urbanregion ring, is a priority.

[N12] In nearly 30 % of the regions, at least one natural landscape is isolated by a single major gap (Figure 6.6).

147

Kag•

Abe•

= Gap = Narrow connection

Sap+

8

Ber+

Nature, food, and water

Mos*

Ott+ Nai+ Can•

San*

Sto+ Ula•

Iqu•

Bra+

*

Cai

Kua+

2

Ban*

Edm• Atl• Eas• Seo

*

Rom+ Por• Teh*

Bei*

Erz•

4

Teg•

Cut•

Mex*

Sdt+

Bar+

6

Rah•

Number of gaps and narrow connections between natural landscapes

148

0 2

4 6 8 10 Number of natural landscapes in urban region

12

Figure 6.5 Number of gaps and connections between natural landscapes relative to number of natural landscapes. Natural landscapes are >100 km2 and compact in shape. Vegetation gaps or breaks separate landscapes and are caused by human clearing, not an intervening river, ridge, or valley. A connection refers to continuous vegetation in a narrows or ‘‘isthmus” or corridor between landscapes. London, Bucharest, Chicago, Philadelphia, Nantes, and Samarinda have 0 or 1 natural landscape present. See Chapter 5 for natural vegetation types, Figure 6.3 caption for landscape types, and Figure 6.2 caption for city information.

Where several natural landscapes are present, regional connectivity may be only slightly reduced. However, where few natural landscapes are present, this is an acute problem for regional connectivity. Here reestablishing the connection is a high priority.

[N13] At least half of the major gaps between natural landscapes are located near the metropolitan area (Figure 6.6). These gaps are particular problems in disrupting regional connectivity for wildlife, both because of present human usage and potential future urbanization.

Number of gaps near metro area and natural landscapes isolated by a single gap

Nature in urban regions 5

≤

≥

4

Mos*

Ber+

Teg•

Cut•

3

2

Mex

Eas•

1

*

Bei Bra+ Kua+ Ula• Erz• Iqu• Abe• Rah•

0

Kag•

= Gap ≤ 50 km from city center = Isolated natural landscape

Ban Cai Nai+

* *

Cai Ban Nai+ Teh

* * *

San Sdt+ Sto+ Ott+ Edm• Atl• San Sdt+ Sto+ Edm• Atl• Mos Seo Ott+ Rom+ Por• Can•

Bar+

Keg

*

*

*

* *

*

Teg*

Cut•

Bar+

Sap+

Ber+

2 4 6 8 Number of gaps between natural landscapes in urban region Figure 6.6 Number of gaps near cities and number of isolated natural landscapes relative to total number of gaps between natural landscapes. Vegetation gaps or breaks separate natural landscapes (>100 km2 and compact in shape) and are caused by human clearing, not an intervening ridge, river, or valley. Isolated landscapes are those whose only connection to another natural landscape has been cut, leaving a vegetation gap; this also considers possible connections outside the urban region. See Chapter 5 for natural vegetation types, Figure 6.3 caption for landscape types, and Figure 6.2 caption for city information.

Wetlands

[N14] Major wetlands are absent in urban regions with cities of >8 million population, generally scarce in regions with cities of 2 to 8 million, and sometimes frequent around cities of <0.5 million (Figure 6.7). Wetlands in urban regions were often drained or ﬁlled long ago for farming purposes. As the human population rose, wetlands disappeared under roads and buildings, and often to reduce mosquito and other insect populations as pests and disease vectors. However, wetlands provide many beneﬁts to society, such as reducing ﬂoodwaters, absorbing and breaking down chemicals, supporting many special wetland species, and providing recreational sites.

149

17

Iqu Nan

12

Edm Sam Por Sam

Ban

Sap

10

90

Kua Ber

Rah

80

Nan

= Wetlands = Lakeshores/ pondshores

Sto

8

60 Por Cut

6

40 4

2 Can

Erz Kag Ott

Buc Bam

Nai

Phi

Rom Sat

Teh Cai

Bra Chi

Lon

Bar

Edm

0 Relatively small 0.25-0.5

Small-medium Intermediate Medium-large 0.5-1 1-2 2-4

20

Natural vegetation cover along lakeshores/ pondshores (%)

Nature, food, and water

Number of major wetlands in urban region

150

0 Quite large 4-8

Mega 8-16

City population (million) Figure 6.7 Major wetlands and natural lakeshores relative to city population size. Major wetland is > approx. 4 km2 ; an unusually long or large wetland is counted twice. Wetlands include salt marsh, mangrove swamp, freshwater marsh, and freshwater swamp, and are present along coasts, along rivers, and in depressions. Lakeshores include major pondshores but exclude shorelines of reservoirs. Natural lakeshore vegetation is the predominant land cover within approx. 1 km of a shoreline. City population is in year 2000 ± 2 yr (Chapter 5 and Table 5.1). See Figure 6.2 caption for city information.

Re-creation of wetlands, large and small, and their beneﬁts is a high priority in urban regions. Especially suitable locations are at the base of certain hills and mountains, on ﬂoodplains of rivers and streams, along coastal areas, and in the outer urban-region ring. Tiny wetlands, some seasonal, may be produced at the ends of stormwater drainage pipes. Food in urban regions Diversity and stability relative to agriculture

[F1] Cropland is the predominant land cover of the urban-region ring in half of the regions (Color Figures 2--39).

Food in urban regions

Number of types of agricultural landscape

5

Rom+

Bei Ott+* Eas•

4

Nai+ Nan• Ula•

3

Lon Chi+* Edm•

1

1

Erz• Atl• Iqu•

San Buc+ Rah•* Bra+

Mos Teh Sdt+ Sap+ Kua+ Sam• Abe•

Cai Mex Sto+ Por• Teg• Kag•

Phi+

Seo

* *

2

0

Bar+

* *

Cut•

Ban*

Can•

Bam+ (13)

Ber+

*

3 5 7 9 Number of agricultural landscapes in urban region

11

Figure 6.8 Number of types of agricultural landscape relative to number of agricultural landscapes. Landscapes are >100 km2 and compact in shape. Agricultural includes cropland and pastureland. See Figure 6.2 caption for city information.

Communities that became cities often started where good soil and a water body come together. Spreading farmland sends sediment and agricultural chemicals into water bodies. The frequency of cropland around cities offers a signiﬁcant opportunity to recognize the values of urban agriculture, from farm communities and economies to food products for the city at low transport cost (Chapter 3). Today prime agricultural soil near cities often sprouts buildings. The spread of buildings in future urbanization should generally be concentrated along or near the boundary between landscape types, such as agriculture and built land or agriculture and natural land. As illustrated in the aggregate-with-outliers model (Forman 1995, Forman and Collinge 1996), these locations minimize degradation to either agricultural or natural landscapes.

[F2] Three or more types of cropland landscape are present in a third of the regions, in contrast to a single type of cropland landscape in a quarter of the cases (Figure 6.8). More landscape types suggest a diversity of food products available, plus ﬂexibility for the future. It also indicates a high diversity of farmland species, plus

151

152

Nature, food, and water diverse farming communities and economies. A priority is to encourage the production of different crops within a landscape, and eventually different types of cropland landscapes.

[F3] Most regions have several separate agricultural landscapes of a type (Figure 6.8). This provides stability for that agricultural type in the event of a spreading pest or disease. The farm support system is likely to be strong. Also stability is provided for the particular group of farmland species present.

[F4] Both kinds of stability, several cropland types and several landscapes of a type, are present in over a quarter of the regions (Figure 6.8). This is the optimum arrangement providing ﬂexibility and stability for longterm agriculture. It also is optimum for sustaining a high diversity of farmland species. Proximity of cropland landscapes to city center

[F5] A cropland landscape <20 km from city center is present in over half of the regions, while the nearest cropland landscape is >45 km distant in an eighth of the cases (Figure 6.9). A nearby cropland landscape, especially for market-gardening can provide convenient food products for the city with low transport cost. It also provides open vistas and clean air, and if valued by society and urban planners, can help prevent outward urbanization. However, it is particularly susceptible to existing human impacts as well as future outward development. Downwind of the city and industrial areas, the cropland landscape is subject to air pollution, and if near the city’s main airport, it is subject to aircraft noise. The somewhat more distant cropland landscapes largely escape these negative effects. More distant croplands can serve for market-gardening with only slightly higher transport cost. And they are easier to maintain and more likely to persist.

[F6] If the nearest cropland landscape were degraded or destroyed, another such landscape is <45 km from city center in 80 % of the regions; however, local food products would have to be transported >65 km in a fifth of the regions (Figure 6.9). The proximity of at least two cropland landscapes provides ﬂexibility and stability for market-gardening. Also farmland species should remain relatively near the metro area. The more distant landscape adds transportation costs, and increases the likelihood of a strip-development corridor across the region, which reduces regional connectivity for wildlife movement and walkers.

Nai+

Bra+

Rah• Abe•

Mos

*

Sdt+

= Nearest landscape = Second nearest landscape

65

* Seo

Chi+

* *

Mex Bei

* SanLon* Ban * *

Cai

Ber+ Rom+

Sto+

Buc+

Ott• Edm• Erz•

20

Bam+ Sap+

Port•

Iqu•

Phi+ Bar+

Teh

*

35

Kua+

Atl•

Teg• Kag•

50

Nan•

Distance from city center to edge of cropland landscape (km)

80

Sam•

Food in urban regions

5 Relatively small 0.25-0.5

Small-medium Intermediate Medium-large 0.5-1 1-2 2-4

Quite large 4-8

Mega 8-16

City population (million) Figure 6.9 Distance from city to two nearest cropland landscapes relative to city population size. Landscapes are >100 km2 and compact in shape. 10 km = 6.2 mi. City population is in year 2000 ± 2 yr (Chapter 5 and Table 5.1). See Figure 6.2 for city information.

[F7] Although data on market-gardening was difficult to find and thus only occasionally mapped on the urban-region images, almost all consultants agreed that at least one market gardening area was present outside a city (Color Figures 2--39). These areas provide food products in proximity and low transport cost to the metropolitan area. Little trucks (lorries) can load up early morning, snake their way through narrow city streets, and provide fresh vegetables and fruits to markets and restaurants. The agricultural park adjacent to Barcelona is a nice example (Chapter 10; Acebillo and Folch 2000, Forman 2004a). However, marketgardening usually intensively uses water, fertilizer, and pesticides. A high priority

153

Nature, food, and water

Average size of patches within cropland landscapes (km2)

20 10 = Wooded patches = Crop fields

5 4 3 2 1 0

London * Berlin+ Rome+ Bucharest+ Stockholm+ Barcelona+ Nantes• Chicago+ San Diego/Tijuana+ Philadelphia+ Ottawa• Edmonton• Portland• Atlanta• Mexico City * Santiago * Brasilia+ Tegucigalpa• Iquitos• Cairo * Nairobi * Bamako+ East London• Abeche• Beijing * Moscow * Seoul * Tehran * Sapporo+ Ulaanbaatar• Erzurum• Kagoshima• Bangkok * Kuala Lumpur+ Cuttack• Samarinda• Canberra• Rahimyar Khan• Average

154

Europe

North America

Latin America

Africa

West-East Asia

South AsiaAustralia

Geographic area, with cities from large to small population Figure 6.10 Average size of woods and ﬁelds within agricultural landscapes relative to geography and city size. Average sizes of woods and ﬁelds are estimated in all agricultural landscapes 1 km2 = 247 acres. Within each geographic area, cities are in decreasing order of population (Table 5.1). See Figure 6.2 caption for city information.

is to maintain at least two major market-gardening areas in proximity to the metropolitan area. Woods and field sizes in cropland landscapes

[F8] In most regions, average field size and woods size are about the same within a cropland landscape no matter the type of cropland (Figure 6.10). Some woods grew up from former ﬁelds, and some ﬁelds are likely to become woods over time. The farmer has ﬂexibility, and is also likely to change the crops over time, as markets and owners and interests evolve. Dispersing small woods evenly across the cropland landscape may spread predators over the area sufﬁcient to reduce crop pest populations, thus increasing crop production. A regular grid on the land is normally considered ecologically undesirable, in part because it favors only a subset of the natural species complement for

Water in urban regions

100

Sap+ Buc+ Cut• Mex Cai Edm•

Built and agricultural land cover around rivers and major streams (% of river/stream length)

* *

80

Rom+ Eas• Ott• Kag• Nan•

= Agricultural land = Built area

Teg• Ban Bra+*

Atl•

60

Chi+ Lon*

Por•

Seo Mos* Can•

*

Bar+

40

Chi+ Atl•

Phi+

*

Ber+ Sam•

Por• Cai Mex Edm• Sap+ Buc+ Cut•

* *

0

San Sto+* Nai+

Phi+

Lon

20

Bei * Sdt+ Kua+

0

Nan• Rom+ Eas• Ott• Kag•

Mos Bar+ * Seo

*

Teg•

Ban Bra+* Can•

Bei * Sdt+ Kua+ San Sto+* Nai+

Ber+ Sam•

Rah• Ula• Iqu• Erz• Rah• Ula• Iqu• Erz•

Teh Abe*• Teh Abe*•

20 40 60 80 100 Natural vegetation cover around rivers and major streams (% of river/stream length)

Figure 6.11 Agricultural and built land relative to natural land around rivers and major streams. Predominant cover type is estimated for the area between approximately 100 and 3000 m from the water along all major streams and rivers (marked on Color Figures 2--39) in urban regions; stream/river corridor vegetation and unmapped small or seasonal streams are excluded. See Figure 6.2 caption for city information.

the area. Thus aggregating the small woods to mimic larger woods, or making lines of woods as stepping stones for movement in appropriate directions, is ecologically useful.

Water in urban regions Land cover around rivers and streams

[W1] Most urban regions have <33 % natural vegetation cover near rivers and major streams (Figure 6.11).

155

156

Nature, food, and water Thus water degradation due to sedimentation, agricultural chemicals, and solar heating is probably widespread across urban regions. Where ﬁelds are irrigated in dry climates, water tables are often lowered and streamﬂow much reduced. Ecologically effective vegetated stream corridors are likely to be few and fragmented. Reestablishing the stream corridors with attached patches of natural vegetation, especially upstream of the city or far downstream, is particularly valuable. Reducing agricultural inputs to streams and rivers, both by ﬁne-scale land-use changes and farming practices, is also valuable.

[W2] Only a fifth of the regions has >80 % natural vegetation cover around rivers and major streams, while another fifth has 40--70 % natural cover (Figure 6.11). In the former case, relatively good overall water quality, aquatic ecosystems, and ﬁsh populations are likely to be present over major portions of the region. In the latter case, stream and river degradation is probably widespread, but some high-water-quality streams and rivers exist in the region, which can serve as valuable species sources for rapid restoration. Reestablishing ecologically effective vegetated stream corridors to help reconnect high-water-quality streams and rivers is a priority.

[W3] Cropland is the predominant human land use around rivers and major streams in almost all urban regions (Figure 6.11). Food products for the nearby city and viable farming communities and economies are real beneﬁts that often need emphasis. Farmland species are well established. The widespread cropland also means extensive warm water, soil erosion, muddy water, sediment-covered bottoms, degraded ﬁsh habitat, and agricultural chemicals, including varied pesticides and nitrogen/phosphorus from fertilizer. A variety of improvements can be made. Better ﬁne-scale farming practices and land uses would help. Future outward development should avoid degrading streams and rivers, as well as disrupting large prime-agricultural-soil areas.

[W4] Considerable built area (10--40 % land cover) surrounds rivers and major streams in 40 % of the regions (Figure 6.11). Consequently, urban runoff and human impacts are likely to be widespread. Various solutions include relocating (often old) industries away from the stream/riverside to industrial parks with efﬁcient water, power, and wastedisposal availability. Increase the length and width of vegetated stream/river corridors. Limit future outward development to sites adjacent to existing built areas.

Water in urban regions Lakeshores

[W5] Half of the regions with a lake(s) present have natural vegetation around 90--100 % of lake shorelines, while nearly half have <30 % of the shoreline length with natural vegetation (Figure 6.7). Generally lakes, unlike dammed reservoirs, are scarce in urban regions, and therefore of special importance for recreation, visual quality, and biodiversity. Continuous natural vegetation around lakeshores is particularly important for maintaining high water quality. In those regions with low protection around shorelines, avoiding development, even dispersed development, is a key to maintaining clear water, natural aquatic ecosystems, ﬁsh populations, and associated recreation. Slopes around cities

[W6] More than half of the cities with nearby hillslopes or mountain slopes facing the city have 90--100 % natural vegetation cover on the slopes (Figure 6.12). Maintaining natural vegetation on these slopes provides many beneﬁts, including high visual quality, good recreation opportunities, and rich biodiversity, all close to the metropolitan area. The vegetation also minimizes soil erosion, mudslides, sediment accumulation, and ﬂood hazard. Forest on slopes provides cool air that on still nights drains downward and helps ventilate a city by pushing out hot air and pollutants. In dry climates, vegetation on nearby slopes increases the ﬁre hazard. ‘‘Skyline conservation” on slopes surrounding the city has deep roots and cultural signiﬁcance in Korea and Japan (Im 1992, Bengston and Youn 2006). Where few nearby city-facing slopes are present, protecting them with natural vegetation is a priority.

[W7] Nearly 30 % of the cities with nearby city-facing slopes have them only 25--50 % covered with natural vegetation (Figure 6.12). As implied in the preceding case, the paucity of protective natural vegetation on these slopes reduces beneﬁts and poses increased hazards. Avoiding additional development is a priority. Fine-scale improvements on the developed slopes involving water, soil, and vegetation should have a signiﬁcant effect. Also, gradually removing buildings on the most inappropriate sites should help.

[W8] Cities with more surrounding city-facing slopes generally have a greater percentage cover of natural vegetation on them, whereas few nearby slopes near a city tend to be much built up (Figure 6.12). In the case of few nearby city-facing slopes, their scarce natural resources are much degraded. Avoiding future development, rigorously implementing

157

Nature, food, and water 100

Abe•

Erz• Bam+

Natural vegetation cover on nearby slopes facing a metro-area (%)

158

Teh

*

Mex * Seo Ula•* Teg• Sap+

Por•

Nai+ Kag•

80 Sdt+

Rom+

60 Bei

40

San

*

*

Bra+

Bar+

20

0

Can•

20 40 60 80 Proportion of surroundings with nearby slopes facing a metro area (% of 45° arcs on land)

100

Figure 6.12 Natural vegetation cover on nearby slopes surrounding a city relative to the proportion of the surroundings with city-facing slopes. Proportion of surroundings with nearby slopes is the percentage of the 45◦ arcs on land (i.e., excluding major water bodies) (Color ﬁgures 2--39). Natural vegetation cover is the average for hillslopes/mountain-slopes within approx. 15 km of a metro area in each 45◦ arc. See Chapter 5 for natural vegetation types, and Figure 6.2 caption for city information.

ﬁne-scale improvements, gradually removing buildings, and perhaps establishing large parks, is a priority for these scarce valuable sites. Nearby major water bodies and coastlines

[W9] A major surfacewater body (river, sea, bay, lake) is adjacent to half the cities (Figure 6.13). This is convenient for shipping/ferry transport, local recreation, and removal of urban pollutants. But, if the difference in elevation between city and water

Major water-body type

Water in urban regions

Sea

Sap+ Bar+ Eas•

Seo Rom*+ Kua+

Saltwater body

Sdt+ Kag•

Ban

Major lake or reservoir

Chi+ Bra+ Sto+

Major river

Cai Ban* * Phi+ Bam+ Ott• Edm•

Cut• Por• Nan• Iqu• Sam•

*

San * Sto+ Teg• Cut•

Lon

*

Bei

*

Rah•

Buc+

Mos Mex * Teh * * Ber+ Nai+

None within 100 km Adjacent (0-15)

Nearby (>15-50)

Distant (>50-100)

Ula• Erz• Can• Atl• Abe•

>100

Distance from city center to nearest water-body (km) Figure 6.13 Nearest major water-body type relative to distance from city center. Major is in a global rather than regional context. Three cities (Bangkok, Stockholm, Cuttack) are near two major water-body types. 10 km = 6.2 mi. See Figure 6.2 for city information.

body is small, a major ﬂood hazard for the metro area is likely. Also nearby coastal or riverside recreation sites are likely to be degraded and polluted, especially close to and downriver of the city. Fish migration on the river is apt to be blocked by urban water pollution.

[W10] A quarter of the regions has no major water body present (i.e., within 100 km of city center), another quarter has the nearest major water body 15--100 km distant (Figure 6.13). Aquifers are likely to be especially important in these regions, and require nearly continuous natural vegetation cover to protect water quality. These regions are likely to have little ﬂood hazard, less-polluted recreation sites serving fewer people, and a less-convenient shipping/ferry port. A strip of development between city and port, which forms a barrier to regional wildlife movement, is apt to be present. Major breaks in the strip development should be established and maintained for regional wildlife movement.

159

Nature, food, and water 90 Built area along coastline (% of coastline length)

160

Sdt+

= 10 km of coastline closest to city = 40 km of coastline next closest to city

Bar+

70

Seo

Phi+ Phi+

*

Bar+ San

*

50

Sto+ Sam•

Sap+

Nan•

30

Kag• Eas•

Nan• Sam•

0

0

*

Ban * Seo Ban * * Kua+

10 Kag• Eas•

Lon * Lon

Rom+ Rom+

Sdt+

Sap+

Kua+

Cut• San

Teh

• Cut• Teg Teg•

Teh

*

Sto+

*

20 40 60 80 100 Distance from city center to sea or saltwater bay (km)

* 120

Figure 6.14 Built area along coastline relative to distance from city center. Predominant land cover within approx. 1 km of a coastline is measured for the 10 km of coastline closest to a major city, and for the next closest 40 km (20 km in each direction) of coastline. 10 km = 6.2 mi. See Figure 6.2 caption for city information.

[W11] The coastline closest to a city is much more built up than that somewhat further away, with the difference being most pronounced where city and coast are close (Figure 6.14). This suggests that clean water, natural vegetation, attractive beach areas, and good recreation are most likely along coastlines far from a city, and in coastline locations not directly opposite the city. Strip development between city and nearest coastline should have major breaks to maintain regional wildlife connectivity. Protecting coastline stretches beyond the portion closest to a city, and avoiding dispersed coastline development, should maintain the rich natural and societal beneﬁts of relatively natural coastlines. Water supply and drainage area

[W12] In general, large cities use reservoirs for water supply, medium cities mainly use lakes and reservoirs, and small cities use rivers, and in a few cases, streams or groundwater (Figure 6.15).

Distance to water-supply source (km)

Water in urban regions

Bei Mos* San * Teh * * Bar+ Bra+

Distant (>50-100)

Nearby (>15-50)

Ber+ Chi+ Sto+

Adjacent (0-15)

Lake

Ban * Phi+

Nai+

Bra+

Ott• Edm• Kag• Atl• Iqu•

Teg•

Bam+ Abe•

Reservoir

River

Stream

Groundwater

Seo * Lon * Sdt+ Por• Eas• Can•

Primary water-supply source for city Figure 6.15 Distance from city center to water-supply source relative to type of water supply. Brasilia is listed twice because water pollution in an adjacent large reservoir has effectively caused the construction of distant small reservoirs. 10 km = 6.2 mi. See Figure 6.2 for city information.

Since cities typically grow in population and spread outward, alternatives for water supply are important for stability. Two suitable sources are much better than one, and three are somewhat better than two. Large reservoirs for large cities are hard to locate and create, so their protection is especially important. Medium cities typically have more options, but probably should plan for when they may be large cities. Small cities normally have still more options, but may have limited resources to locate and create water supplies for a future mediumsized city. Providing adequate alternatives to supply a future larger city population with clean water is a priority. Some cities doubtless beneﬁt from a nearby large aquifer which must be protected with vegetation cover.

[W13] On average, reservoirs have the best drainage-area protection by natural vegetation, while drainage-area protection for lakes and rivers varies widely (Figure 6.16). Reservoirs usually have an upstream drainage basin and headwater stream network that should be protected. Without adequate land protection, rapid stream erosion, reservoir sedimentation, and loss of reservoir water capacity is

161

Nature, food, and water Por• Can•

100

San

Natural vegetation cover on drainage area for water-supply source (%)

162

* Bei Seo* Bar+*

80 Ber+

Sdt+

60

40

Ott• Iqu•

Mos

Kag•

Teg•

Phi+ Atl•

Nai+

Bam+

River

Stream

Groundwater

*

Sto+

20

Lon * Eas• Chi+

0

Lake

Reservoir

Primary water-supply source for city Figure 6.16 Natural vegetation cover on drainage area relative to type of water-supply source. Drainage area refers to the general area around or upslope of a water source (see Color Figures 2--39) and may not correspond with a speciﬁc drainage basin (watershed/catchment). See Chapter 5 for natural vegetation types, and Figure 6.2 caption for city information.

a familiar situation around the world. Also chemical pollutants can essentially eliminate the usefulness of a reservoir (e.g., see large reservoir to the northwest in Color Figure 7). A water-supply source on a river is essentially always upriver of a city, since the downriver stretch is subject to urban pollutants. As urbanization spreads upriver, the water-supply source may move further upriver (or elsewhere). Therefore protection of extensive continuous natural-vegetation cover in areas surrounding upriver and tributary stretches is important. Water treatment costs, e.g., for lake and river sources, vary widely depending on how well or poorly the upslope land is protected with natural vegetation. Stream-corridor vegetation helps, especially for erosion/sedimentation and phosphorus inputs, but covering the surrounding land with vegetation helps much more.

Water in urban regions The loss of vegetation protecting a water-supply drainage basin also increases the cost of water. Indeed, a sharp rise in cost may occur when vegetation cover drops to some 70 % (Peter Kareiva, personal communication).

[W14] The few cities with water supply from stream or groundwater have considerable built area in the general drainage area of the water supply (Color Figures 2--39). Tegucigalpa apparently largely uses streamwater (supplemented by some lakewater), while apparently Bamako and Abeche mainly use large numbers of groundwater wells to provide water supply for the city population. Spreading development around the somewhat-fragile streams poses a severe threat for erosion/sedimentation, chemical pollution, and water loss. Avoiding additional development in the general drainage area is important. In the case of extracting groundwater close to the city, urban pollutants of numerous types can readily percolate into the groundwater. Neither case is stable. Achieving viable watersupply alternatives for a future larger city is a high priority.

[W15] Forty percent of the cities has an adjacent water supply, and a sixth of the cities has a distant water supply (Figure 6.15). In the former case, adjacent relatively high-density development plus air pollution degrades the water supply. In addition, urbanization, both densiﬁcation and outward spread, occur around the water supply, worsening the problem. Establishing alternative water supplies at a distance is a high priority (Color Figure 9). Cities with a distant water supply have little urbanization or air pollution threat. However, they have a higher maintenance and water-transport cost. Perhaps more importantly, the city must usually depend on other political/administrative units to adequately protect the drainage basin. Establishing strong long-term land protection measures with dependable policing is important. Thus 37 ‘‘major” patterns and results focused on nature, food, and water have emerged from analyzing the urban regions (Color Figures 2--39). Useful guidelines and priorities doubtless apply widely for other cities worldwide. The next chapter continues this analysis by focusing on built systems and built areas.

163

7

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions

Following the preceding chapter on nature, food and water, perhaps surprisingly we now turn to built areas to learn about natural systems and their human uses in an urban region. Consider two diplomats attempting to negotiate a treaty. If wise, each spends considerable time in advance learning about the other’s perspectives and concerns. With those dual insights, agreement is more likely and the product should be more solidly constructed. In the present case, we must understand nature in built areas, and how built systems and built areas affect their surroundings. Built systems are basically for the transport of people and goods. Radial highways, ring highways, commuter-rail lines, airports, shipping/ferry ports, and transportation corridors to ports and airports in urban regions are the emphasis here. In contrast, built areas are mainly for locating people and their activities on land. Here we focus on the metropolitan area, satellite cities, towns, certain small sites, strip development, and adjacent land covers. Evidence of regional planning is also highlighted. Several attributes relate to whole urban regions. Those presented include the context of the metropolitan area, border lengths of various built-area types, other major political/administrative units in the region, and the effect of other major cities surrounding an urban region. Interactions of an urban region with other regions, especially the surrounding regions, are usually quite signiﬁcant. Effects may cover essentially the whole urban region, the metro area or city, a particular land-cover type, or speciﬁc sites or types of sites. This subject is explored in more depth in Chapter 11. Because the intermixing and arrangement of built areas and greenspaces is so important for natural systems and their uses, we begin this chapter by exploring

164

Natural systems within and next to built areas the subject. Built areas have big effects on natural areas, and vice versa. Yet, the negative effects are very different from the positive effects. At the core of this chapter are patterns and results from the spatial analyses and comparisons of the 38 urban regions, as described at the beginning of the preceding chapter. Forty-one major patterns or results highlighted here are presented under ‘‘built systems” as S1, S2, S3, etc., ‘‘built areas” as A1, etc., and ‘‘whole regions” as R1, etc. Brief elaborations under each result may: (1) interpret or further discuss it; (2) identify its implications ecologically or for society; and (3) point out useful approaches or solutions for land protection, planning, and other objectives. Some solutions are labeled priority and some high priority, relative to the total set of patterns presented in Chapters 6 and 7. Graphs highlight variability and contrast (compare the four quadrants) as well as central trend. Natural systems within and next to built areas Greenspaces within built areas are introduced at the outset. This leads to a key subject, the effects of proximity of built and natural areas. Greenspaces within built areas

Greenspaces in built areas are particularly signiﬁcant for recreation, inspiration and the general well-being of residents. For instance, biophilic design specialists point out the value of nature, or even a tree, to improving recovery rates of hospital patients, reducing illness, and so forth (Kellert and Wilson 1993, Kellert 2005). Because people are so diverse in a city, designing diverse recreation opportunities is a challenge. A particular park could have numerous types of recreation resources, or each park could provide a different resource (Chapter 1). Also, distributing the resources appropriately in parks across the city is difﬁcult. Some compromise is typical, which often results both from responding to inﬂuential pressure groups and from an overall logical plan. But greenspaces in a city provide many other beneﬁts to society, especially for natural systems. Large or medium-large spaces, such as Berlin’s Tiergarten, New York’s Central Park, and Tokyo’s palace grounds, may contain a good facsimile of natural ecosystems of considerable educational value for residents hemmed in by buildings. Reasonable biodiversity may be present, such as rare meadow plants in Tiergarten (Caroline Chen, personal communication). These relatively large greenspaces therefore serve as important sources of species that spread to small parks, gardens, and other greenspace areas across the city, keeping them somewhat species-rich. The question of how to design the city’s parks for diverse recreation applies also to nature. Should each greenspace be a fair representative of a different natural community, or should each green area have a similar mix of many natural

165

166

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions communities? How should the different ecosystems be distributed across the city, and how can the answer be effectively meshed with recreational opportunities? The questions are tractable and important, but answers are scarce. For instance, ponds and lakes, much-valued by the public for visual quality values, often exist in some city greenspaces. Large and small, shallow and deep, ringed by walkways or almost inaccessible, clean or polluted, these water bodies support very different aquatic ecosystems and species. They also provide many societal functions from water supply and sewage overﬂow to boating/ﬁshing recreation, solid-waste disposal, and ﬂood control. Mosquitoes and other insects are often pests or disease vectors. Meshing these characteristics over a heterogeneously distributed array of large, small, squarish, and elongated city parks is a worthy goal. Large and small natural patches provide somewhat different beneﬁts in rural than urban areas. In the city large greenspaces typically serve as major hydrologic sponges against ﬂooding, maintain the best facsimile of a natural community, and cool the summer city temperature for hundreds of meters outward (Forman and Hersperger 1997). On the other hand, large patches in the urbanregion ring may help protect an aquifer or lake, connect headwater streams, and sustain large-home-range vertebrates. The other major role of urban greenspaces is functional, facilitating natural ﬂows and movements across the city (Figure 7.1). Linear spaces usually reﬂect the presence, or previous presence, of a stream or river. Often streams have become transformed into rushing water in large straight underground pipes. A green strip on the ground over a former stream normally facilitates walking and wildlife movement. Riversides and ﬂoodplains, except during ﬂood stages, may also be effective for the movement of people and animals. Urban ﬂoodplain areas, however, also commonly serve as major infrastructure conduits for cities. Gas, oil, electricity, water supply, stormwater, sewage wastewater, commuter trains, intercity trains, trucks, and cars ﬂow along different ﬂoodplains. Furthermore, little roads commonly cross and go along ﬂoodplains for the maintenance and repair of the infrastructure conduits.

Effects of proximity of built and natural areas

Diverse ﬂows and movements between a built area and an adjacent natural area may be both positive and negative for each receiving side (Forman 1995, Harris et al. 1996, Hersperger and Forman 2003, Hersperger 2005). The strongest interactions are the negative effects of built areas on natural areas. Very few effects of built areas on natural areas are positive for natural systems and the human activities that depend on them. In the opposite direction,

Natural systems within and next to built areas

Figure 7.1 Linear greenspaces serving as separating barriers or ﬁlters and as channels for ﬂows and movements. The river corridor separates neighborhoods and land uses, while facilitating ﬂoodwater ﬂows and wildlife movement. Vegetation strips, and to a lesser extent, street tree lines channel birds and mammals along them. Note that: street trees shade and cool impermeable surfaces; wildlife can readily cross under the bridge on both sides; the dam outlet ﬁxes the channel in place so that normal river migration across a ﬂoodplain cannot take place; and stormwater runoff from pipes enters downriver. Milwaukee, USA. Photo courtesy of US Federal Highway Administration.

i.e., effects of natural areas on built areas, both positive and negative, appear to be intermediate in impact. The negative effects of built areas on natural areas are highlighted in more detail because these have the greatest importance for planning and the urban region. Heat, air pollutants, chemical pollutants in stormwater, human wastewater, vehicular trafﬁc, non-native and invasive species, domestic animals, and especially people dispersing outward from a built area are all familiar. The last

167

168

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions of these, movement of people, produces varied effects, such as tree cutting, overﬁshing, livestock grazing, road construction, soil erosion, damaging sensitive habitats and disturbance of wildlife (Luck et al. 2004). Each of the diverse effects often has a major degradation effect, generally extensively analyzed in the literature, on an adjoining natural ecosystem, whether terrestrial or aquatic. More modest interactions go in the opposite direction, from natural to built area. Here positive effects include cooling during hot periods and a source of species and biodiversity. A natural area adjacent to a built area can absorb and break down pollutants, and provide ready access to nature and nature-related recreation for residents. Negative interactions of natural areas on built areas include being a source of mosquitoes and other insects as pests and disease vectors, ﬂoodwater, wildﬁre in dry climates, pest animal populations, and dangerous large predators. If everyone lived in an enormous skyscraper and the rest of an urban region were nature, people would have ready access to a small area around their building, and natural systems would be the best ever. Conversely, if the homes of everyone were evenly distributed across the region, natural systems would be extensively degraded, probably the worst possible design. The planning trick then is to create a land with people aggregated enough to sustain widespread natural systems, in order that their uses for society remain vibrant for the long term. With all urban regions little-planned and urbanization ongoing, one could focus on mitigation or restoration. Yet those approaches have usually been pieceby-piece site-by-site activities. While valuable, especially for the most sensitive or strategic places, a different two-step planning approach seems more promising. First plan the region for big areas, then mold small places to ﬁt the big vision.

Built systems Key patterns and results identiﬁed in the ﬁgures are grouped into the following categories: (1) ring highways; (2) radial highways, ring highways, and commuter-rail lines; (3) airports and aircraft noise; (4) shipping/ferry ports, airports, and development corridors; and (5) wildlife underpasses and overpasses. Ring Highways

[S1] Half of the urban regions have no external ring highway, only radial highways (Figures 7.2 and 7.3). In these cases, strip (ribbon) development tends to spread along and near the radial highways producing car-dependent communities, interrupting stream/ river corridors, and forming a barrier to regional wildlife movement. However,

Built systems

80

60

40

20

0

Europe

North America

Latin America

Africa

West-East Asia

*

* * * *

*

*

*

*

London Berlin+ Rome+ Bucharest+ Stockholm+ Barcelona+ Nantes• Chicago+ San Diego/Tijuana+ Philadelphia+ Ottawa• Edmonton• Portland• Atlanta• Mexico City Santiago Brasilia+ Tegucigalpa• Iquitos• Cairo Nairobi+ Bamako+ East London• Abeche• Beijing Moscow Seoul Tehran Sapporo+ Ulaanbaatar• Erzurum• Kagoshima• Bangkok Kuala Lumpur+ Cuttack• Samarinda• Canberra• Rahimyar Khan• Average

Multilane ring road around and outside metro area (% possible arc on land)

100

South AsiaAustralia

Geographic area, with cities from large to small population Figure 7.2 Length of multilane ring highway around a metropolitan area relative to geography and city size. Coastal cities have a surrounding arc <360◦ . Ring road length is measured outside the metro area; the absence of a ring road portion indicates that the road is within the metro area or does not exist. Cities are in decreasing order of population (Table 5.1) within each geographic area.

∗

= city

population >4 million (‘‘large”); + = 1 to 4 million (‘‘medium”); • = 250 000 to 1 million (‘‘small”). City abbreviations: Abe (Abeche, Chad); Atl (Atlanta, USA); Bam (Bamako, Mali); Ban (Bangkok, Thailand); Bar (Barcelona, Spain); Bei (Beijing, China); Ber (Berlin, Germany); Bra (Brasilia, Brazil); Buc (Bucharest, Romania); Cai (Cairo, Egypt); Can (Canberra, Australia); Chi (Chicago, USA); Cut (Cuttack, India); Eas (East London, South Africa); Edm (Edmonton, Canada); Erz (Erzurum, Turkey); Iqu (Iquitos, Peru); Kag (Kagoshima, Japan); Kua (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia); Lon (London, United Kingdom); Mex (Mexico City, Mexico); Mos (Moscow, Russia); Nai (Nairobi, Kenya); Nan (Nantes, France); Ott (Ottawa, Canada); Phi (Philadelphia, USA); Por (Portland, USA); Rah (Rahimyar Khan, Pakistan); Rom (Rome, Italy); Sam (Samarinda, Indonesia); Sdt (San Diego/Tijuana, USA/Mexico); San (Santiago, Chile); Sap (Sapporo, Japan); Seo (Seoul, South Korea); Sto (Stockholm, Sweden); Teg (Tegucigalpa, Honduras); Teh (Tehran, Iran); Ula (Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia). See Table 5.1 and Chapter 5 for further urban region information.

169

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions 13 Number and type of primary radial roads extending outward beyond metro area

= Multilane = Two laned pave (sealed)

11

9

7

5

3

1 0

Europe

North America

Latin America

Africa

West-East Asia

*

* * * *

*

*

*

*

London Berlin+ Rome+ Bucharest+ Stockholm+ Barcelona+ Nantes• Chicago+ San Diego/Tijuana+ Philadelphia+ Ottawa• Edmonton• Portland• Atlanta• Mexico City Santiago Brasilia+ Tegucigalpa• Iquitos• Cairo Nairobi+ Bamako+ East London• Abeche• Beijing Moscow Seoul Tehran Sapporo+ Ulaanbaatar• Erzurum• Kagoshima• Bangkok Kuala Lumpur+ Cuttack• Samarinda• Canberra• Rahimyar Khan• Average

170

South AsiaAustralia

Geographic area, with cities from large to small population Figure 7.3 Radial roads extending outward from a metropolitan area relative to geography and city size. Radial roads extend ≥20 km beyond the metro area border. See Figure 7.2 caption.

green wedges between the radials and extending into metropolitan areas are likely to be present. Connected greenspace in wedges facilitates the movement of species inward and nature recreationists outward from the city. Breaks in the strip development for stream/river corridors and wildlife movement are important.

[S2] In Europe, ring highways are widespread and extend an average 56 % of a complete ring outside the metro area, whereas elsewhere all ring roads are <50 %, and the average is 25 % (Figure 7.2). An effect of geography is evident for this pattern. Europe, which combines a dense population with high vehicle use, has mainly chosen the outer-ringhighway design. Europe’s cities tend to spread concentrically, or dispersed towns and villages become nuclei for urbanization which later threatens to coalesce.

Built systems Some metropolitan areas have engulfed ring roads, but most regions have avoided, or not yet followed, the European approach. Instead, the varied beneﬁts and relatively few shortcomings of a star or spoke design of radial roads are maintained.

[S3] Excluding Europe and North America, all large cities have ring highways and almost no small or medium city does (Figure 7.2). Both city size and geography effects are present for this design, one of the very few such cases in the 78 major patterns highlighted in Chapters 6 and 7. Ring roads are a response to large metropolitan areas and help stimulate surrounding urbanization. Or perhaps cities in other geographic areas are copying Europe and North America where vehicles and trafﬁc ﬁrst became dense. Irrespective, large cities (>4 million population) have strong development pressure inward and outward from ring roads, which make rural areas and villages seem easily accessible to the metro area. In contrast, small and medium cities are mainly surrounded by nearby connected greenspace. Thus the difference between large and small/medium cities for average distance of city residents to connected greenspace is great and growing. Radial highways, ring highways, and commuter-rail lines

[S4] Large cities tend to have more primary radial roads than do small cities, and those of large cities are multilane, whereas radial roads of medium and small cities are about half multilane and half two-lane (Figure 7.3). A city size effect is evident. Large cities are directly connected to more satellite cities and distant towns and cities, whereas small cities are more indirectly connected. More radial roads create more strip-development barriers to regional walking, wildlife movement, and stream/river corridors, and subdivide the region into more and smaller sections. Strip development tends to spread over a wider area. In contrast, with few radials, large segments of greenspace escape development pressure. Two-lane highways tend to roadkill more wildlife, but multilane highways cause a greater barrier effect, wider wildlife-avoidance zones, and more habitat fragmentation, which normally is much more ecologically serious than roadkills (Forman et al. 2003).

[S5] All European and North American cities have at least four primary radial roads, while cities in Africa and South Asia-Australia average 2--3 radials, many being paved two-lane (Figure 7.3). A geography effect is present. Fewer radial roads mean that larger areas escape development pressure. Trafﬁc and development are channeled in only two or three directions from the city.

171

172

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions

[S6] Cities without ring roads have few primary radial roads, and paved two-lane radial roads are essentially limited to cities without ring roads (Figures 7.2 and 7.3). With few widely separated radial highways, perhaps less pressure builds for a ring road. Two-lane radials may suggest mainly local trafﬁc rather than longdistance intercity transport travel. Housing and jobs are local rather than dispersed, so commuter trafﬁc and associated commuter residential areas are limited. The adage, ‘‘If you want to work in a city, move and live there,” seems to apply. Erzurum, the one exception to the pattern, has two-lane radials with a partial multilane ring road (Color Figure 17).

[S7] Cities with considerable ring-road length normally have relatively few primary radial roads, and cities with many radials have little ring-road length (Figures 7.2 and 7.3). In general, cities seem to either invest in many primary radial roads that may protect more nearby greenspace or invest in a ring road. More radials mean more strip development, more interrupted stream/river corridors, more barriers to wildlife movement, more connected greenspace, and more in-and-out greenspace access between city and countryside. More radial roads also imply more human dependence on the metro area, rather than dispersed movements in surrounding landscape areas. Beijing is an interesting exception, with both a relatively complete ring road and many radials (Color Figure 7). Beijing has heavily invested in ring roads, with the fourth ring relatively complete and the seventh ring beginning in places (Yang Rui and Laurie Olin, personal communications). No large greenspace is apt to remain for future residents or for nature near the metropolitan area.

[S8] Cities with more radial roads may also have more radial commuter-rail lines extending beyond the metropolitan area (Figure 7.4). Although limited data on commuter-rail systems were collected, apparently commuter-rail service is mostly within metropolitan areas. Radial commuterrail lines, however, serve separate communities outside certain metro areas. Cities with many radial highways plus outside commuter-rail lines (London, Philadelphia) may have a large outside commuter population that demands an alternative to radial vehicular-trafﬁc ﬂows. Large connected nearby greenspaces could be maintained with such an emphasis on radial transportation routes. Airports and aircraft noise

[S9] Most urban regions have one or two major airports, while 10 % have five or more airports (Figure 7.5).

Built systems

Number of primary radial commuter-rail lines extending outward beyond metro area

Lon

Ber+

10

*

Rom+

8

Sto+

6

Mos

Phi+ 4

*

Chi+ Sop+

2

Seo

*

Cai Por•* 0

Bei

*

Edm• 1

3

5

7

9

11

13

Number of primary radial roads extending outward beyond metro area Figure 7.4 Number of radial commuter-rail lines relative to radial highways extending from a metropolitan area. Number of commuter-rail lines is determined based on 16 possible compass directions. All radial roads are multilane and extend ≥20 km beyond the metro-area border. See Figure 7.2 caption.

All regions have a major airport near the city for passenger air travel, and commonly also for cargo freight. A second major airport provides ﬂexibility if the nearby one becomes inadequate, or if passengers and cargo are concentrated in different airports, or if international and local/regional travel is separated. Most regions probably have a major military airport. Some regions have many airports (Moscow, London), presumably with different major uses. Some airports may be decommissioned (Edmonton), but remain conspicuous on the aerial images and are therefore mapped.

[S10] Most cities have the nearest major airport <20 km from the city center, and most cities with two or more major airports have the second closest one >20 km distant (Figure 7.6). The primary airport is close and convenient to the city for passengers and business cargo, and may be connected to the city by rail. Where the second

173

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions 100 = Agriculture = Built land = Natural land

80

Land cover subject to aircraft noise (%)

174

60

40

20

0 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Number of major airports in urban region Figure 7.5 Land-cover types subject to aircraft noise relative to number of major airports. Percentage cover is the average for land extending approximately 5 km (3 mi) out from both ends of major runways at major airports in the urban region. The 5 km distance is based on Miller (2005).

closest one is rather distant, it is less convenient for travel to and from the city and would tend to catalyze a connecting strip of development, serving as a barrier to stream/river corridors and regional wildlife connectivity. However, from air trafﬁc and air pollution perspectives being further from the city is good for a local/regional airport. Being distant is also good for a military airport assuming that the many temporary personnel live nearby.

[S11] Most major airports are in cropland; a third of the regions have major airports mainly in built areas, and 15 % mainly in natural land (Color Figures 2--39).

Built systems

Distance from city center to nearest major transportation terminals (km)

90 = Shipping/ferryport = Nearest airport = Second nearest airport

105

128

70

50

30

10

Europe

North America

Latin America

Africa

West-East Asia

*

* * * *

*

*

*

*

London Berlin+ Rome+ Bucharest+ Stockholm+ Barcelona+ Nantes• Chicago+ San Diego/Tijuana+ Philadelphia+ Ottawa• Edmonton• Portland• Atlanta• Mexico City Santiago Brasilia+ Tegucigalpa• Iquitos• Cairo Nairobi+ Bamako+ East London• Abeche• Beijing Moscow Seoul Tehran Sapporo+ Ulaanbaatar• Erzurum• Kagoshima• Bangkok Kuala Lumpur+ Cuttack• Samarinda• Canberra• Rahimyar Khan• Average

0

South AsiaAustralia

Geographic area, with cities from large to small population Figure 7.6 Distance from city center to nearest coastal port and two nearest airports relative to geography and city size. 10 km = 6.2 mi. See Figure 7.2 caption.

Cropland is the primary land use in most urban regions so land lost to airport construction, transportation, and associated facilities is normally insigniﬁcant regionally. Typically built areas around an airport grew up around it. Runway and infrastructure expansion of a major city or military airport is a strong force, so the airport should be located distant from key natural and cultural resources.

175

176

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions If important resources are nearby, such as a key aquifer and an agricultural park (Barcelona; Chapter 10), strategic planning for a second location, e.g., to emphasize local/regional travel or cargo transport, is important.

[S12] Aircraft noise in the urban regions occurs in built land most, cropland next, and natural land least (Figure 7.5). Aircraft noise in and by built land is well known to create problems for people, from stopping a conversation or class to physiological stress or disruption of park recreation. Avoidance and mitigation are commonly attempted. Animals, like people, hear and are stressed, but additionally they respond to predator-prey interactions. Wildlife may not hear a predator and get eaten, or may go hungry if the prey are gone, or may see a sibling get eaten and then avoid the area. Avoidance and mitigation are also important for nature. Cropland is probably least affected by aircraft noise. Wildlife species there are mostly tolerant generalists and may be common where cropland is extensive and connected. Shipping/ferry ports, airports, and development corridors

[S13] About half of the shipping/ferry ports are close to the city center, while the other ports are evenly distributed from about 20 to 140 km distant (Figure 7.6). Ports at a distance require transport of goods and people to and from the city. This stimulates strip (ribbon) development, with associated disruptions of stream/river corridors and wildlife crossing. The aquatic zone around a port is polluted and, in addition, adjoining shoreline stretches tend to be degraded. Port areas are also likely to be sources of non-native species, some of which may become invasive in the region.

[S14] About one-sixth of the cities has two of the three major transportation facilities (port and two closest airports to center city) >20 km out (Figure 7.6). This suggests a considerable length of strip-development corridors, with negative consequences for natural systems as described above. Busy ﬂows of truck and car trafﬁc continue throughout the day, unlike the typical pulses of commuter trafﬁc. Wildlife underpasses and overpasses

[S15] Most urban regions have busy multilane highways passing between or cutting through major natural areas, where wildlife underpasses or overpasses are especially valuable to provide connectivity for walking and wildlife movement (Color Figures 2--39). Wide underpasses and overpasses designed with vegetation for wildlife crossing across major highways are widely and successfully used in Europe, and are

Built areas present in North America and elsewhere (Trocme et al. 2003, Iuell et al. 2003, Forman et al. 2003, van Bohemen 2004). The best designs facilitate crossing by targeted species as well as a large portion of the fauna. Local residents and walkers on regional trail systems often also use the crossings. Wildlife-crossing structures mitigate the barrier and habitat-fragmentation effects of highways, and enhance regional connectivity for movement among natural areas. Thus major wildlife-crossing structures are a priority in the outer urban-region ring to facilitate regional wildlife movement, walking on regional trail systems, and connectivity for local residents. Built areas For built areas the following groups of patterns and results are highlighted: (1) green patches and corridors within metropolitan areas; (2) metropolitan-area form; (3) evidence of regional planning; (4) satellite cities; (5) towns in the urban-region ring (or urb-region ring); and (6) ‘‘natural” disasters. Green patches and corridors within metropolitan areas

[A1] All combinations of high, medium, and low densities of green patches and green corridors are present within the metropolitan areas. Most common is a high density of patches and low density of corridors; a sixth of the metro areas has a low density of both greenspace types (Figure 7.7). Small and medium greenspaces dispersed over a metro area provide nearby access to nature and recreation for residents. A high density provides stepping stones for many species to move across built areas, and even tiny patches can be effective for such movements. Linear green patches are corridors that further enhance species movement, especially in the direction a corridor is oriented. Green corridors also line and protect streams, though in metro areas most streamwater is in underground pipes so the green corridors are over former streams. In the urban regions greenspace patches are considerably more abundant than corridors. Increasing the number and area of parks in metropolitan areas with little greenspace per person is a valuable goal. Mapping the average distance between housing units and parks (e.g., as in Chicago and London) pinpoints priority areas for new parks. These internal greenspaces facilitate accessibility of people to nearby parks, but do not provide connected greenspace accessibility for walking and bicycling to greenspace outside the metro area, a much-valued weekend activity (e.g., around Dutch cities).

[A2] About 30 % of the metro areas lack a greenspace ≥1 km2 (250 acres), whereas about a fifth of the metro areas has a ≥10 km2 (4 mi2 ) greenspace present (Figure 7.7).

177

Seo * Phi+

Medium

Sdt+ Bra+ Bam+ Kag• Eas•

Rom+ Bar+ Can• Teg•

Bei * Nai+ Sap+ Ott•

Low

High

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions

Estimated density of greenspace corridors within metro area (number per unit area)

178

Mex San * * Buc+ Edm• Erz• Abe•

Ban Teh * * Ber+ Nan• Sam•

Low

Medium

Por• Alt•

Lon

*

Mos Chi+* Sto+ Kua+ Cut• Ula• Iqu• Rah• High

Estimated density of greenspace patches within metro area (number per unit area) Figure 7.7 Estimated density of greenspace corridors relative to greenspace patches within a metropolitan area. See Figure 7.2 caption.

The presence of a medium-to-large greenspace in a city, such as Berlin’s Tiergarten, New York’s Central Park, and Tokyo’s palace area, provides several ecological and societal beneﬁts unavailable with only small greenspaces. Areas surrounding the large green area, especially downwind, are cooler in summer (Schmid 1975, von Stulpnagel et al. 1990). Wetlands and a higher, more natural watertable may be maintained. Flood hazard warrants evaluation, but might be lower. A facsimile of natural ecosystems can be supported that provides educational and inspirational values. Rare native species as in the meadows at Tiergarten may be present from time to time (Caroline Chen, personal communication), though probably not sustained. The large greenspace is a key source of species that populate the city’s small parks, gardens, and other spaces. As in the three examples mentioned, large greenspaces are of major interest to a large population and may remain stable, may evolve, or may undergo convulsions along with society.

Built areas

Proportion of a metropolitan area constituted by its largest greenspace (%)

3.0

Rah•

Iqu•

2.5

Abe•

2.0

1.5 Sam• Nai+

1.0 Teg• Eas• Erz•

0.5

Cut• Ula•

Bar+ Can• Bra+ Kag• Buc+ Sto+ Nan• Rom+ Sap+ Sdt+ Ott• Edm• Kau+ Lon Teh Ber+ Atl•

*

0

San

Bam+

1

*

4

Bei Por •

*

*

Mex Ban

Seo Mos

*

*

*

* Phi+ Chi+

9

16

25

74

Largest greenspace within metropolitan area (km2) Figure 7.8 Proportion of metropolitan area constituted by its largest greenspace relative to area of the largest greenspace. Note that the horizontal axis changes with the square of a number. 1 km2 = 0.39 mi2 . See Table 5.1 for area of metro area. See Figure 7.2 caption.

Creating a large greenspace, such as converting an aging industrial area to a large park, requires commitment to a long-term plan. Alternatively, a cluster of smaller greenspaces might be partially linked and enhanced to provide some of the beneﬁts mentioned.

[A3] Small cities, especially in developing nations, generally have only small greenspaces, which, however, are the largest greenspaces relative to the surface area of metropolitan areas (Figure 7.8). Both city size and geographic area effects are evident here. Small urban greenspaces are mainly of value for nearby residents’ recreation and as stepping stones for species movement across built areas. Still, in small cities these small parks are close to the extensive greenspaces around the metropolitan area,

179

180

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions which may provide accessible recreation opportunities and are major multidirectional sources of species moving into the city. The problem to be overcome is that the city almost certainly will grow, e.g., from small to medium. About a century ago Frederick Law Olmsted designed Boston’s much-heralded emerald necklace near the edge of the city, and Antoni Gaudi designed Parque Guell (Color Figure 40) on the outskirts of Barcelona. Analogously, the establishment of greenspaces, including large ones, on the edge of small cities is a priority. Such parks will well serve the larger city of the future. Metropolitan-area form

[A4] Half of the metro areas adjoin major physiographic features, often on two sides, that constrain outward urbanization spread (Figure 7.9). Adjacent seacoasts (San Diego, Barcelona) and lakeshores (Chicago) tend to produce elongated metropolitan areas, and consequently long stretches of polluted seawater, of damaged or destroyed coastal ecosystems, and of degraded recreational resources. Adjacent mountain ranges (Sapporo, San Diego/Tijuana) tend to have considerable development on nearby slopes, with associated ﬂood hazards, erosion/sedimentation problems, reduced visual quality, and so forth. The regional geometry also makes major transportation networks particularly difﬁcult. Protecting nearby slopes with natural vegetation and establishing coastal natural areas and parks long enough to maintain clean water are priorities. Focusing development around satellite cities or other locations away from slopes and coastlines is also a key part of the solution.

[A5] About half of the metropolitan areas are compact with 0--2 major built lobes, while metropolitan areas with several (4--9) lobes have a highly convoluted form (Figure 7.10). A compact metropolitan area has a minimal perimeter and hence degrades outside greenspaces the least. Without strip-development corridors it also poses the least disruption of regional connectivity for wildlife and major stream/river corridors. With people of a compact metro area being closer, on average, to the city center, public transport can be efﬁcient. In contrast, several built lobes projecting outward from a metro area suggest prominent strip development along major radial transportation routes, with associated shortcomings as described above. The long metro-area border means that much surrounding greenspace is degraded. Maintaining a relatively compact form provides important beneﬁts.

[A6] Metropolitan areas, on average, have 3.5 major built lobes and 2.3 major greenspace wedges on their perimeter, with lobe and wedge number positively correlated (Figure 7.10).

Volcano Earthquake Flood Fire

High Med. High

Mex

* Sdt+ Sap+

Med.

Iqu•

High

Ban

Med.

San?

Cai * Kua+ Bam?+ Sam?• Nan?• Rah?•

*

*

Cut•

High

Can•

Med. All four disasters

Susceptibility to “natural” disaster affecting major portion of metro area

Built areas

Low

Teh? Bar+ * Ula?• Kag?• Teg?• Mt.mt.

Mt.sea

Bra?+ Sto?+

Riv..Wet.riv. wet. Two sides

Lakebay

Bei? * Por?•

Mt.

Mos Nai?+ Lon * Ott• Seo? Ber+* Edm• Eas?•* Chi+ Buc+ Atl• Phi+ Erz?• Rom?+ Abe?• Sea One side

Lake None

Physiographic constraint on spread of metropolitan area Figure 7.9 Estimated susceptibility of a metropolitan area to ‘‘natural” disasters relative to the presence of physiographic features constraining the spread of a metro area. Rough susceptibility estimates are based on a known 200 yr history for the city or being located in a known longer-term disaster zone. ‘‘Natural” disasters or catastrophes have signiﬁcant property damage over a major portion of the metro area, a pattern often due in part to inappropriate preceding human activities. Hurricane/cyclone, tsunami, and avalanche/mudslide may occur, but apparently are not frequent major problems in the 38 urban regions selected. Hills are not considered to be a major constraint on urban expansion. Mt. = mountain range; riv. = large river; wet. = major wetland; bay = coastal saltwater bay. See Figure 7.2 caption.

As just indicated, major built lobes around a metro area pose diverse important problems for natural systems in the region. Major greenspace wedges (e.g., Stockholm, Copenhagen) projecting into a metro area, on the other hand, offer more beneﬁts than shortcomings. The wedges are subject to degradation, sometimes intense, by being squeezed between built areas usually with high population densities. However, green wedges, like a high density of small parks, provide nearby access to greenspace for people. Unlike small parks though,

181

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions 9 Number of greenspace wedges and built-area lobes on perimeter of metropolitan area

7

= Greenspace wedges = Built-area lobes

5

3

1 0

Europe

North America

Latin America

Africa

West-East Asia

*

* * * *

*

*

*

*

London Berlin+ Rome+ Bucharest+ Stockholm+ Barcelona+ Nantes• Chicago+ San Diego/Tijuana+ Philadelphia+ Ottawa• Edmonton• Portland• Atlanta• Mexico City Santiago Brasilia+ Tegucigalpa• Iquitos• Cairo Nairobi+ Bamako+ East London• Abeche• Beijing Moscow Seoul Tehran Sapporo+ Ulaanbaatar• Erzurum• Kagoshima• Bangkok Kuala Lumpur+ Cuttack• Samarinda• Canberra• Rahimyar Khan• Average

182

South AsiaAustralia

Geographic area, with cities from large to small population Figure 7.10 Greenspace wedges and built lobes of metropolitan area relative to geography and city size. Major greenspace wedges or coves projecting into a metro area are ≥40 % of the average radius of a metro area (wedge length measured from a line connecting the tips of adjacent metro-area built lobes). Some wedges included mainly result from a large river bisecting the metro-area (See Color Figures 2--39). Major built lobes are ≥40 % of the average radius of a metro area (lobe length measured from the ends of adjacent wedges or coves). See Figure 7.2 caption.

wedges provide connectivity for walking and bicycling, as well as accessibility to greenspaces outside the metro area. Furthermore, green wedges serve as major routes for species to enter and populate greenspaces in the metro area. Therefore, in addition to the remarkable recreation beneﬁts provided, green wedges may be the best strategy to provide a richness of nature throughout the city.

Built areas As a long-term priority planning strategy, creating green wedges in existing built areas would normally be slow and very difﬁcult. However, establishing major connected greenspaces near the edge of metro areas can create future wedges or a ring of major parks for the city as it expands outward.

[A7] A few metropolitan areas have mainly ‘‘scalloped” borders of medium-length lobes and coves (Color Figures 2--39). The scallop border design (e.g., Bucharest; Color Figure 10) degrades slightly more regional greenspace than does a compact metro area, as described above, but it degrades noticeably less greenspace than does a lobed metro area. Furthermore, little strip development along major transportation routes is present to interrupt major stream/river corridors or regional wildlife movement. The border scalloping provides ready access to surrounding regional greenspaces for people living in the outer portion of the metro area. Indeed, examining the pros and cons of scalloped-edge natural patches is informative (Forman 1995). Overall though, combined with a high density of small green patches in the central portion, a metro area with scalloped borders seems to be a reasonably good design.

Evidence of regional planning

[A8] Ten extremely different metro-area-form and urban-region-ring attributes identified suggest that regional planning, emphasizing at least one of the attributes, has been used in 60 % of the urban regions (Figure 7.11). Spatial planning is common for small spaces and rather uncommon for broad areas. The issue comes to a head in urban regions where so many people live and resources are so ﬁnite, but political/administrative units, often overlapping, typically are so many. Based on the regional attributes identiﬁed, apparently regional planning has been signiﬁcant in a majority of the urban regions. Further work, or the reader, will have to decide whether the attribute or attributes chosen for emphasis has led to a wise plan and a suitable urban region. In fact, the degree to which regional attributes reﬂect planning or simply unplanned human and natural changes warrants evaluation. Several signiﬁcant attributes may be embedded with unequal weight in a plan, so in this analysis only the heavyweight one(s) clearly emerges. Regional planning of urban regions and metropolitan areas is a high priority. Beijing is noteworthy here because it has a single (strong) government for virtually its entire urban region, about 200 km in diameter. In this case, regional planning might be relatively easy, avoiding the paralysis often produced by many overlapping political/administrative units characteristically present in urban

183

* *

* *

Bangkok Bucharest+ Santiago Portland• Berlin+ Sapporo+ Nantes• Stockholm+ Ottawa• Seoul Cairo Barcelona+ Mexico City Edmonton• Abeche• Samarinda• Tegucigalpa•

* * *

London Moscow Beijing Rome+

Canberra• Brasilia+

*

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions

Attribute suggesting regional land-use planning

184

Compact metro-area form Three or more greenspace wedges Symmetrical metro-area lobes Metro-area with abrupt border Urban growth boundary Greenbelt

Tehran Chicago+ San Diego/Tijuana+ Philadelphia+ Nairobi+ Kuala Lumpur+ Bamako+ Iquitos• Cuttack• Kagoshima• Erzurum• Ulaanbaatar• East London• Rahimyar Khan• Atlanta•

*

Ring road Distinct separate communities Extensive canal/ irrigation system Close-by forest to protect water supply Large woods throughout urban-region ring

High

Medium

Low

Degree of regional land-use planning suggested by metro-area form and urban-region ring attributes

None of the 11 regionalplanning attributes

Figure 7.11 Attributes suggesting regional land-use planning relative to the degree of regional planning suggested. The conspicuous spatial attributes highlighted relate either to the form of the metropolitan area or to patterns in its surrounding urban-region ring (see Color Figures 2--39). Also see captions for Figures 7.2 and 7.10.

regions. However, without the checks-and-balances such units provide, regional plans could be brilliant, a disaster, or somewhere in between.

[A9] A quarter of the urban regions manifests two or three attributes that suggest regional planning (Figure 7.11). Compared with the prominence of a single attribute suggesting regional planning, 2--3 attributes may indicate a greater role of regional planning in the evolution of a metropolitan area and urban region. They may also represent a better balance among competing strategies.

[A10] A compact metropolitan-area form in a third of the regions is the most frequent attribute suggesting regional planning, and a ring highway in a sixth of the regions is the next most-frequent attribute (Figure 7.11). A compact metro-area form means the near absence of major built lobes, major greenspace wedges, and an elongated spread. As described above, major lobes are normally along transportation routes and elongated forms along

Built areas coastlines and/or mountain valleys. Major greenspace wedges doubtless involve signiﬁcant regional planning. A compact metro-area form typically results from concentric-zone-like spread from an initial nucleus (Chapter 8). Planning decisions were made to not elongate, to develop along spokes, or to protect green wedges, but rather to keep the focus on the city center. A ring highway outside the metropolitan area reﬂects regional planning, not only for transportation ﬂows, but also to develop areas between radial transportation strips. As described above, this has important negative consequences for natural systems and their human uses. Perusal of the other attributes suggesting regional planning emphasizes that some have mainly positive and some negative implications for these societal objectives. Thus regional planning per se is not the solution, but rather wise and strategic planning of large areas, which accords high priority to natural systems and their human uses, is the objective. Satellite cities

[A11] Satellite cities around large cities are mostly within 50 km of the metropolitan area, whereas most satellites around small cities are 50--100+ km distant (Figure 7.12). City size has an important effect here. The relative proximity of satellite cities to large metropolitan areas means that targeting their development instead of metro-area expansion is more feasible, since new residents are not too far from the big city. Also, while the length of highway strip development to the nearer satellite cities disrupts major stream/river corridors and wildlife movement in the urban region, it is not as serious as developed strips to more-distant satellites. However, more-distant satellite cities are more likely to be near natural areas, where outward urbanization may cause signiﬁcant degradation to natural systems.

[A12] Large-population cities tend to have more satellite cities in the urban region than do small cities, with 5--16 around most large cities and 0--2 around most small cities (Figure 7.12). The number of satellite cities depends on the size of the core city. Few satellites in small-city urban regions mean that most urban people live in the region’s core city where urban resources are concentrated. Thus natural systems of the region tend to be little affected by the few dispersed concentrations of people. People in and around the regional greenspace mainly live in villages and towns, and, on average, are more attuned to nature, though may or may not protect it well. The abundance of satellite cities around large core cities means that almost all regional greenspace is near and subject to the diverse impacts of many cities. Since dispersed satellite cities also tend to expand outward, natural systems and

185

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions 120

Average distance from metro area to centers of satellite cities (km)

186

Erz• Sam•

Iqu•

100

Buc+ Cut•

Ott•

Abe•

80

San

* Mex

Rom+

*

Nan•

Edm•

60 Eas• Nai+

Mos Cai

Ban Bra+ Ber+ Kag• Kua+ Bar+ Chi+

*

Por• Teh Sap+ Rah•

*

40

Atl•

20

Sam• Ula• Bam+ Teg•

0

*

Sdt+

Phi+

Bei

*

* Lon

*

Seo

*

Sto+ 2

4

6

8

12

16

Number of satellite cities in urban region Figure 7.12 Distance from metropolitan area to satellite cities relative to the number of satellite cities in an urban region. Only satellite cities ≥20 km from the metro-area border are included. The area of a satellite city is almost always noticeably larger than that for the more numerous towns present (see Color Figures 2--39). 10 km = 6.2 mi. See Figure 7.2 caption.

their human uses all remain under a degree of degradation threat. Strategically protecting large greenspaces in key areas, especially in the outer urban-region ring, in the face of many expanding urban circles, is a high priority. Towns in the urban-region ring

[A13] In urban regions half the towns (excluding those by water bodies) are in agricultural areas, and a fifth near the boundary between agricultural and natural areas (Figure 7.13). Since the urban regions are overwhelmingly dominated by cropland, not surprisingly towns are most common in mainly cropland areas. These towns may

Built areas

= Agricultural land = Natural area = Near border of agricultural and natural areas 80

60

40

20

*

North America

Latin America

Africa

West-East Asia

*

* * * *

*

*

*

Europe

Average

0

London 60 Berlin+ 27 Rome+ 24 Bucharest+ 8 Stockholm+ 22 Barcelona+ 51 Nantes• 37 Chicago+ 21 San Diego/Tijuana+ 7 Philadelphia+ 20 Ottawa• 13 Edmonton• 11 Portland• 27 Atlanta• 11 Mexico City 27 Santiago 12 Brasilia+ 20 Tegucigalpa• 9 Iquitos• 10 Cairo 30 Nairobi+ 9 Bamako+ 13 East London• 14 Abeche• 12 Beijing 20 Moscow 68 Seoul 41 Tehran 13 Sapporo+ 19 Ulaanbaatar• 5 Erzurum• 17 Kagoshima• 4 Bangkok 33 Kuala Lumpur+ 28 Cuttack• 14 Samarinda• 2 Canberra• 7 Rahimyar Khan•

Towns in different locations within urban-region ring (%)

100

South AsiaAustralia

Geographic area, with cities from large to small population Figure 7.13 Locations of towns in agricultural and natural land relative to geography and city size. Towns are almost always noticeably smaller in area than satellite cities (see Color Figures 2--39). Percentage is relative to all towns (number listed near bottom) in an urban-region ring. Location means mainly surrounded by agricultural land or natural land (usually landscape-sized, i.e., ≥100 km2 and compact in shape), or near the border between the land types. Towns not included are along rivers, major streams, and other major water bodies. See Figure 7.2 caption.

187

188

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions retain much of their rural appearance and culture, but almost all are near the metropolitan area or a satellite city. Other than the normal agricultural activities, effects of these towns on natural systems and human uses are usually limited. Towns near borders between cropland and natural land are discussed below.

[A14] Most urban regions have no towns in natural areas, and hardly any region has >25 % there (Figure 7.13). Within natural landscapes and large natural patches, towns commonly have signiﬁcant negative impacts on natural systems, including water, soil, and wildlife. Analogous negative impacts also occur on human land uses, such as recreation and water supply, that depend on intact natural systems. Fortunately urban regions have few towns in natural areas. Limiting growth of the existing ones is a valuable investment.

[A15] Towns near borders of agricultural and natural areas are widespread, i.e., present in >75 % of the regions (Figure 7.13). Towns near the boundary between agricultural and natural areas are well located, because they displace little valuable land and their outward impacts are mainly on the edges of the natural and cropland areas. This pattern is consistent with the aggregate-with-outliers model for optimally meshing different land uses in a landscape (Forman 1995, Forman and Collinge 1996). If villages are to grow into towns in a region, limiting the growth of villages in natural areas, plus encouraging it in those near the border of agricultural and natural land, is a priority. ‘‘Natural” disasters

[A16] Many regions are susceptible to a ‘‘natural” disaster that affects a major portion of the metropolitan area, with flood hazard being the problem in about half of the cases (Figure 7.9). Although appropriate data on this important subject were difﬁcult to ﬁnd and interpret, it appears that metropolitan areas could be called hazardous places due to their location and their concentration of people and structures. Flooding from an old dam that fails or bombing by warplanes would be humancaused disasters. Natural disasters are earthquakes (e.g., Kobe, Japan), debrisﬂows from volcanic eruptions (Perera, Colombia), and hurricanes/cyclones (Darwin, Australia). Yet natural disturbances may become ‘‘disasters” due in major part to human activities. Thus high levees holding back a huge lake broke in a 2005 hurricane to cause widespread inundation of the adjacent lower-elevation

Whole regions New Orleans. Disaster-preparedness planning is important, but tends to become high-proﬁle following rather than before a disaster. Flooding, following heavy rainfall and/or snowmelt, is the most widespread disaster hazard in urban regions. The process is accentuated by hard surface cover of buildings and associated roads that have spread on mountain- and hillslopes. Linear roads and their stormwater pipes accelerate stormwater runoff to streams and rivers. But streams are commonly straightened, squeezed by legal and illegal structures in ﬂoodplains, and channeled to underground pipes with hydraulic rather than hydrologic water ﬂows, further accelerating downwater ﬂows. Pipes and streams lead to rivers, which commonly have normal low water ﬂows and may seem inconspicuous or inconsequential. Yet rivers in urban regions are commonly straightened, channelized with rock or concrete barriers, squeezed from the sides, and pockmarked with bridges and other pilings. Wetland sponges and ﬂoodplain riparian woodland are largely long-gone. The combined result of these mountain/hillslope, stream, and river activities is periodic big ﬂoods -- enormous water volumes zooming down a river channel, aimed directly at the metropolitan area. Flood disasters result. A package of solutions is the answer (Chapter 10; Forman 2004a).

Whole regions Important results and patterns relative to whole regions are grouped as follows: (1) urban-region rings relative to metropolitan areas; (2) land cover near and far from metro areas; (3) unique features near metro-area borders; (4) border length of built area in urban regions; and (5) nearby major cities and political/administrative units. Urban-region rings relative to metropolitan areas

[R1] The metropolitan area is almost always a small, centrally located portion of the urban region, averaging 8 % of the area, and being <1 % in a third of the regions (Figure 7.14). The rather large area beyond the metropolitan area, the urban-region ring, means that typically a reasonable amount of space exists for multiple resources and human activities in an urban region. Also resources are generally convenient for the city, as the central nucleus of a region. However for two exceptions, Chicago and Philadelphia, the metro area exceeds 25 % of the urban region, suggesting that the urban-region ring and its resources are somewhat limited (Color Figures 13 and 27). Philadelphia is especially problematic because its region is hemmed in by urban regions of surrounding cities. Indeed, a competition for

189

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions 30 000

Area of urban-region ring (outside the metro area) (km2)

190

Edm•

Sdt+ Iqu• Abe• 26 000 Ula• Bam+ Nai+ Cai Bra+ Rah•

Bei Mos

*

Can•

22 000

San

Sam• Erz•

*

Teh

Ber

*

*

*

*

Mex Lon

*

Ott• Buc+

18 000

Teg• Nan•

Ban

Sap+

Eas•

Rom+

*

* Atl•

Por•

Seo

*

14 000

Sdt+

Kua+ Sto+ Bar+

10 000

Chi+ (29.7) Kag•

Phi+ 6 000

(26.5)

0

4

8

12

16

Proportion of an urban region constituted by the metropolitan area (%) Figure 7.14 Area of the urban-region ring relative to the proportion of an urban region constituted by the metropolitan area. 1000 km2 = 386 mi2 . See Table 5.1 and Figure 7.2 caption.

space and resources, such as housing development and recreation opportunities, occurs in the outer portions of Philadelphia’s urban region. Rapid expansion of protected natural resources around cities with relatively small urban rings is a high priority.

[R2] Most urban-region rings are rather large (12 000 to 30 000 km2 ), though a handful are quite limited in area (Figure 7.14). Small urban-region rings have a relative shortage of natural and agricultural land. Chicago and Philadelphia have small urban-region rings in part because their metropolitan areas are very large, and as just mentioned, Philadelphia because of surrounding cities. But cities on coastlines, such as Kagoshima and Barcelona, may also have relatively small urban regions, due mainly to geometry and a water body (Color Figures 6 and ). Small urban-region rings may have a

Desert Grassland

Teh * Abe•

Savanna

Ula• Can•

Wooded area

Nai+ Cut• Eas•

Bar+

Mixed woods + crops Cropland

Predominant land cover close (<10 km) to the metro area

Whole regions

Bei Buc+ * Lon * Phi+ Ban Nan• * Chic+ Rom+ Cropland

Sap+

Mos* Teg• Seo* Kag• Ber+ Atl• Sto+

Kua+ Sam• Iqu•

Mex * Bam+ Ott•

San* Por•

Mixed woods + crops

Wooded area

Bra+

Savanna

Sdt+

Edm• Erz•

Cai * Rah•

Grassland

Desert

Predominant land cover of the urban-region ring Figure 7.15 Predominant land cover close to the metro area relative to land cover of the urban-region ring. Built area was excluded from the estimates; probably in no case would its inclusion change a result. Grassland includes pastureland; desert includes desertiﬁed area. Cities in the diagonal band have the same land cover close to the metro area as across the urban-region ring as a whole. See Figure 7.2 caption.

relative shortage of natural and/or agricultural land. For such cities, naturalresource protection is a high priority. Land cover near and far from metro areas

[R3] Most urban regions have the same predominant land cover close to the metropolitan area as across the whole urban-region ring, and generally the larger the city the more likely cropland predominates close to the metro area (Figure 7.15). A city size effect is evident. The prevalence of cropland close to large cities means that urbanization outward is mainly on cropland. But since cropland dominates most urban regions and is both near and far from the city, the loss of cropland to urbanization would normally be of minimal importance. However,

191

192

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions protecting soils and locations close to the metropolitan area that are especially valuable for market-gardening (Chapter 3) is an important exception.

[R4] In nearly 40 % of the urban regions, agriculture (cropland or mixed crops/woods) is more prominent close to the metropolitan area than across the urban-region ring as a whole, where natural land (desert, grassland, or forest/woodland) usually predominates (Figure 7.15). In these regions with somewhat limited agricultural land, urbanization spread of the metropolitan area mainly covers this valuable land. Experience from some urban regions indicates that, since the original community began by prime agricultural soil, urbanization over time may cause a signiﬁcant loss of the region’s best soils. Urbanization spread from satellite cities and towns in the urban-region ring, on the other hand, is more likely to degrade natural land. As described above, this may be quite signiﬁcant depending on the amount and location of natural land. Unique features near metro-area borders

[R5] Almost all metropolitan area border lengths are about 35 to 350 km (22-220 mi) long, though three exceptions have much longer convoluted borders (Figure 7.16). The border length of a metropolitan area is a rough overall index of how much surrounding greenspace is degraded by the metro area. Cities with populations from 260 000 to over 10 million almost all have metro-area borders within a single order of magnitude. Three outliers, Chicago, Atlanta, and Philadelphia, have much longer boundaries, in part because of their convolutions of major built lobes and green wedges, and in part because of sprawl. The lobes generally, but not entirely, follow major transportation routes. The greenspace wedges generally, but not entirely, follow major stream or river corridors. Extensive lowdensity ‘‘unsatisfactory” outward urbanization spread, or sprawl, has pushed the overall metro-area border on ﬂat or gently rolling terrain far outward from the city center. A greenbelt (e.g., London) or urban growth boundary (Portland) has been used to arrest further sprawl and its reverberating impacts.

[R6] Almost all metropolitan areas have at least one unique natural-system-related feature close to its border, while a quarter of the metro-areas have three or more such features nearby (Figure 7.16). These diverse unique natural-system-related features (e.g., a scenic viewpoint, historical site, geologic feature) are threatened by existing human activities, as well as by potential urbanization spread near almost all metro areas. This is particularly evident by large cities. Identifying and protecting areas around these

Whole regions Sdt+

Number of unique/distinctive natural-systems-related features close (<10 km) to metropolitan area

6

4

Nai+

2

Bra+

Bar+

Erz• Kag• Teg• Nan• Cut•

Por•

0

Edm• Sto+ Ber+ Teh*

Sap+ 100

*

Seo* Bei *

Ott•

(748) (707) (538)

Ula• Bam+ Cai Rah• Rom+ *San Iqu• Buc+ * Abe• Ban* Can• Eas• Sam•

Lon

200

Chi+ Atl• Phi+

Kau+ Mos*

Mex

*

300

400

Border length of metropolitan area (km) Figure 7.16 Unique/distinctive natural-systems-related features close to a metropolitan area border relative to the length of the border. The highly diverse features identiﬁed around the 38 metro areas are illustrated by: the main water-supply reservoir; a major archaeological and tourism site; rare coastal vegetation site; one of only two wetlands; and only major market-gardening area. 100 km = 62 mi. See Figure 7.2 caption.

locations should reduce degradation and maintain the features. Some features have combined cultural heritage, natural systems, and recreational values. Border length of built areas in urban regions

[R7] Three-quarters of the urban regions have an average built-area border ‘‘density” of <5 km length per 100 km2 (8 mi/100 mi2 ) (Figure 7.17). High-border-density regions have widespread negative effects of built land on natural land, and both negative and positive effects of natural land on built land, as described at the beginning of this chapter. Most urban regions currently have rather low average border lengths, equivalent to a line less than

193

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions 15

Abundance or “density” of built-area borders in urban region (average border length in km per 100 km2)

12

9

6

0

*

North America

Latin America

Africa

West-East Asia

*

* * * *

*

*

*

Europe

Average

3

London Berlin+ Rome+ Bucharest+ Stockholm+ Barcelona+ Nantes• Chicago+ San Diego/Tijuana+ Philadelphia+ Ottawa• Edmonton• Portland• Atlanta• Mexico City Santiago Brasilia+ Tegucigalpa• Iquitos• Cairo Nairobi+ Bamako+ East London• Abeche• Beijing Moscow Seoul Tehran Sapporo+ Ulaanbaatar• Erzurum• Kagoshima• Bangkok Kuala Lumpur+ Cuttack• Samarinda• Canberra• Rahimyar Khan•

194

South AsiaAustralia

Geographic area, with cities from large to small population Figure 7.17 Abundance or ‘‘density” of built-area borders in urban region relative to geography and city size. Abundance or density equals total border length [metro area + inner satellite cities + outer satellite cities + towns] × 100, divided by area of urban region. 1 km/km2 = 1.6 mi/mi2 . See Figure 7.2 caption.

5 m (16 ft) long in a football ﬁeld. However the Chicago and Philadelphia regions, with >12 km/100 km2 border density, are outliers (Color Figures 13 and ). Much surrounding greenspace in these regions is doubtless degraded. [R8] Overall, the metropolitan area contributes >40 % and towns <40 % to total border length in a region; satellite cities contribute the least and have the least-variable totalborder-length from region to region (Figure 7.18).

Whole regions

M

60

M

T

20

M T

M

T

40

SM S S M M

S M

M M T

S

T T

S

S

T SM

M

T

M M

M

T TTS M M

T

T

M

T

M

M = Metropolitan area S = Satellite cities T = Towns

M

T M

T

M TS T

S ST

S

S T

S

T M T T M T T MM M T T T T M M S M T S S T MS S S S

T

T

S S

T S

S M

S S S

T T

M

S

S

S

S

S

Europe

North America

Latin America

Africa

West-East Asia

*

* * * *

*

*

*

*

London Berlin+ Rome+ Bucharest+ Stockholm+ Barcelona+ Nantes• Chicago+ San Diego/Tijuana+ Philadelphia+ Ottawa• Edmonton• Portland• Atlanta• Mexico City Santiago Brasilia+ Tegucigalpa• Iquitos• Cairo Nairobi+ Bamako+ East London• Abeche• Beijing Moscow Seoul Tehran Sapporo+ Ulaanbaatar• Erzurum• Kagoshima• Bangkok Kuala Lumpur+ Cuttack• Samarinda• Canberra• Rahimyar Khan•

S

M T

M

S S

T

T M M

M S

S

0

M

Average

Proportion of total border length of built area in urban region for different-sized communities (%)

80

South AsiaAustralia

Geographic area, with cities from large to small population Figure 7.18 Proportion of built-area border length due to metropolitan area, satellite cities, and towns relative to geography and city size. Border length of the metro area and all inner and outer satellite cities was directly measured, while length for towns was estimated from a representative sample. Cities and towns are differentiated by area (see Color Figures 2--39). See Figure 7.2 caption.

This emphasizes that the border length of metropolitan areas matters, and is associated with degrading the greatest area of regional greenspace. The metroarea border plus that of nearby cities (in the inner urban-region ring) provides about half of the total border length for the region. Greenspace in this area tends to be close to the huge metro-area population, which also is likely to expand outward. In the outer portion of the urban region, satellite cities and towns provide the other half of the total border length. In this area many town and small-city governments with different perspectives, mostly local, make decisions that affect

195

Built systems, built areas, and whole regions 100 = Directions with a nearby major city (>250 000 population) outside the urban region = Directions with a boundary dividing the urban region, so that the outer portion is in a different major political/administrative unit or jurisdiction

80

60

40

20

*

North America

Latin America

Africa

West-East Asia

*

* * * *

*

*

*

Europe

Average

0 London Berlin+ Rome+ Bucharest+ Stockholm+ Barcelona+ Nantes• Chicago+ San Diego/Tijuana+ Philadelphia+ Ottawa• Edmonton• Portland• Atlanta• Mexico City Santiago Brasilia+ Tegucigalpa• Iquitos• Cairo Nairobi+ Bamako+ East London• Abeche• Beijing Moscow Seoul Tehran Sapporo+ Ulaanbaatar• Erzurum• Kagoshima• Bangkok Kuala Lumpur+ Cuttack• Samarinda• Canberra• Rahimyar Khan•

Proportion of directions surrounding a metro area (% of 45° arcs on land)

196

South AsiaAustralia

Geographic area, with cities from large to small population Figure 7.19 Proportion of surrounding directions with a nearby major city or other major political/administrative unit present relative to geography and city size. Proportion of surroundings refers to land, thus excluding sea, coastal bay, and major lake. Nearby cities outside the urban region are >250 000 population and are generally located <1.5 times the distance from the center of the focal city to its urban region boundary (more precisely they are the 60 % and 40 % distance cases described in Figure 5.2 and its caption). A major political/administrative boundary indicates that another nation, state, province, department, county, or equivalent unit is present in the urban region. See Table 5.1 and Figure 7.2 caption.

Whole regions urbanization and natural resources. Both present and future impacts around different towns are likely to vary and ﬂuctuate. Targeting windows of opportunity for local natural-resource protection, and using planning and economic resources of the region as a whole, should provide for the future. Nearby major cities and political/administrative units

[R9] Most metropolitan areas have nearby major cities outside the urban region in 25--50 % of the surrounding directions; a fifth of the metro areas are nearly surrounded by other cities, and a few have no nearby cities (Figure 7.19). Nearby major cities outside an urban region are competitors, often for space and resources in the outer portions of a region, as illustrated above for Philadelphia. Metro areas surrounded by outside cities would do well to quickly focus on land protection in the outer portions of their urban regions.

[R10] Two-thirds of the urban regions contain land of a different major political/ administrative unit (one-third does not), and for 20 % of the regions half or more of the directions surrounding a city include such land in the urban region (Figure 7.19). This suggests considerable competition for space and resources in outer portions of urban regions, where political control and decisions by, e.g., another nation, province/state, or county, diminish the inﬂuence of the core city. For example, critical water-supply sources and drainage-basin protection for the metropolitan area are often in the outer portion of a region. The regions with different major political/administrative jurisdictions in several directions probably need some kind of an ongoing regional authority, in order to plan and sustain regional resources for all political/administrative units over time. In summary, 41 ‘‘major” patterns and results emerge here from comparing the 38 urban regions worldwide. These patterns apply to built systems, built areas, and whole regions. Adding the results for nature, food, and water (Chapter 6) makes a total of 78 patterns identiﬁed from the global urban-region analysis. Of course, other patterns, including many minor ones, exist. Surprisingly, very few of the patterns correlate with either geography or city population size (Chapters 6 and 7). Patterns for natural systems and their human uses seem to cut across culture, geography, and city size, and be inherent characteristics of urban regions themselves. As a consequence, the patterns suggest general principles and useful guidelines of wide applicability. Indeed that is a salutary conclusion for planning, natural systems, and society.

197

8

Urbanization models and the regions

Suppose you placed a small oval rug-sized aerial photo of your favorite city in the center of a huge room, and invited a group of children to paint a ‘‘mural” on the ﬂoor. Lots of trees and buildings and roads and playgrounds and people and farmland and water might appear. Some children may work together to portray a neighborhood, while others play follow-the-leader and create repeated patterns. Most would probably paint their own idiosyncratic visions. The resulting mural could be artistically delightful. But would it be a promising model for your city, as it spreads outward progressively meshing with surrounding land? The preceding three chapters have highlighted existing patterns of urban regions worldwide. A rich array of sites and resources appears in the wide ring of land surrounding our metropolitan areas. In this chapter on urbanization we turn to change, especially changing spatial patterns and their consequences, as metropolitan areas spread outward (Godron and Forman 1983, Forman and Godron 1986, Forman 1995, Lindenmayer and Fischer 2006). This dynamic view of an urban region is central to ecological understanding and to wise planning. A static or constant world is impossible. Maintaining valuable human and natural resources over time requires ﬂexibility, even adaptability, to get through gradually changing conditions. Gradual urbanization is one of the most conspicuous changes around cities (Turner et al. 1990, Meyer and Turner 1994, Germaine et al. 1998, Schneider et al. 2003). In essence, urbanization refers to densiﬁcation and outward spread of the built environment. People and buildings become denser within a metropolitan area in several familiar ways, such as inﬁlling on vacant lots and converting single-housing units to multiple-unit housing, low- to high-rise residential, and residential to mixed commercial--residential areas (Vigier 1997, Kuan and Rowe 2004, Chen et al. 2004, Ozawa 2004). Shanghai, Hong Kong and Singapore

198

Land-change patterns and models are striking examples of densification (Kuan and Rowe 2004, Wu 2006). Other internal changes in urban land use, such as park establishment, gentriﬁcation, infrastructure construction, and industrial development, could be included in the urbanization concept even if they involve no change in population density (Schwartz 2004). These internal structural changes in a city or metropolitan area tend to be quite important in how it works (Hall 2002). The concept of urbanization used here is more speciﬁc than some deﬁnitions, such as the spatial diffusion of people that creates new landscape patterns, or the transformation of landscapes formed by rural life styles into urban ones (Antrop 2000). With this book’s focus on urban regions, particularly beyond the city, the outward spread or expansion component of urbanization is primary. Numerous expansion patterns of the built environment outside a metropolitan area have been described, and others are possible. Therefore, rather than attempting to brieﬂy address numerous types of development, we focus on the few central widespread urbanization patterns for which others seem to be variations. Straight-forward analyses and simple spatial models to understand urbanization are an important goal of this chapter. These analyses and models lead to quite interesting results and principles, the other primary goal. The process and results presented are based on a landscape ecology perspective, 38 large-tosmall cities on all continents, a dual focus on natural systems and their human uses, and 18 useful informative attributes in urban regions. Additional perspectives, cities, major dimensions, and detailed variables should be explored in future work to see which, if any, patterns and principles should be reﬁned or replaced.

Land-change patterns and models Imagine kangaroos hopping around our kitchen, while we carefully pour a glass of wine, measure a bit of salt for the soup, and examine some small grape-sized objects on the ﬂoor. The place would change and not for the better. Surely we would notice and do something. Analogously, the urban region is changing. Unnoticed? Noticed too late? An inevitable result of the tyranny of small decisions (Odum 1982)? Growth and market economics will take care of any problems (Chapter 3)? Urban regions are too big and complex to do anything? Or? Looking at the process of urbanization is a useful start. Common urbanization patterns on the land lead off this section. Spatial models are then introduced to help understand the urbanization patterns. Finally, a section on attributes for evaluating patterns and models highlights the importance of number, type, and breadth of measures for evaluating quite-different urbanization alternatives.

199

200

Urbanization models and the regions Common urbanization patterns

Two major factors, physiography and planning, provide constraints on urbanization and lead to the characteristic spatial patterns of urban expansion (Fainstein and Campbell 1996, Simmonds and Hack 2000, Antrop 2000, Berger 2006). The prime physiographic constraints are mountains and water-bodies, especially sea, estuary, major river, and large lake or wetland. Planning, using legal and/or enforced constraints, creates diverse spatial patterns such as greenbelts, green wedges, and transportation corridors. With no major constraints, concentric growth is the archetypal form of outward urbanization. From the rounded perimeter of a city or metropolitan area a relatively equal amount of expansion over time occurs in all directions. Three other common growth patterns should be mentioned in the context of no constraints. First infill builds on unbuilt spaces embedded in the metropolitan area. Second, for metro areas with green wedges present (Chapter 4), urbanization creates a compacting or rounding pattern that ﬁlls in the wedges (e.g., Seoul, Melbourne). Third, a sequence of expansions in different directions tends to maintain a rounded form with bulges (e.g., growth of London up to 1830 [Turner 1992]). The bulges pattern or model of urbanization seems more characteristic than the rounded pattern, because investment for development is more likely targeted to a speciﬁc area on a metro-area perimeter than to a narrow strip along the perimeter. Still more common patterns result from urbanization in the presence of planning and physiographic constraints (Barker and Sutcliffe 1993, Warren 1998, Pandell et al. 2002, Ozawa 2004, Ishikawa 2001, Clark 2006). Green wedges, greenbelt, urban growth boundary, or ring of parks may be present near a metropolitan area. Green wedges are unbuilt greenspaces projecting into the metro area (e.g., Stockholm, Copenhagen, Melbourne). A greenbelt is a protected band or zone of greenspace around a city where urban growth is prohibited or permitted at a very slow rate (London, Seoul). An urban growth boundary is a ‘‘line in the sand” beyond which urbanization is prohibited or can only proceed at a much reduced rate (Portland). Unlike an urban growth boundary, urbanization may occur outside a greenbelt zone. A ring of parks is analogous to a greenbelt except that transportation corridors and nearby development radiate outward from the city leaving, for example, four to eight large parks in a ring and separated by highway corridors (Budapest). The Seoul greenbelt might become a ring of parks (Color Figure 35) (Bengston and Youn 2006). More-distant patterns of urbanization are characteristically near transportation corridors (Figure 8.1) or satellite cities (Browder and Godfrey 1997, Simmonds and Hack 2000, Antrop 2000, Schneider et al. 2003). Development

Land-change patterns and models

Figure 8.1 An early stage of strip development along a radial highway. Note that the existing clusters of buildings in lower left and upper center are now connected by a line of houses on very large lots that further bisect and degrade the central farmﬁeld area. North of Gainesville, Florida. R. Forman photo courtesy of L. D. Harris.

along major transportation corridors radiating from a city produces an overall pattern reminiscent of a star with long points or a wheel-hub with spokes (e.g., Chicago 1850 to 1967 [Schmid 1975]). Strip development along a major radial transportation corridor progressively subdivides the landscape or region. Focusing urbanization concurrently around satellite cities in an urban region increases somewhat the size and importance of these small cities, while helping to protect the land near a large metropolitan area (Barcelona), which may be of considerable ecological importance (van der Ree and McCarthy 2005). If development is targeted to several or many satellite cities, rather than a few, the population will be considerably dispersed and a much more complex transportation network will probably develop to criss-cross the land. The dispersed pattern of urbanization is more complex (Jenks et al. 1996, Gordon and Richardson 1997, Theobold et al. 1997, Bullard et al. 2000, Hobbs and Theobold 2001, Jenerette and Wu 2001, Hobbs and Miller 2002, Lopez 2003, Berger 2006, Kahn 2006). Most characteristic is where dispersed development, rather than compact concentric-zone expansion, occurs outside a metropolitan area. This produces a wide zone of relatively low-density development, or sprawl,

201

202

Urbanization models and the regions around the city (e.g., many North American cities). But dispersed development can also be combined with the bulges, greenbelt, transportation corridors, and satellite cities patterns. Irrespective, the dispersed development pattern is associated with a massive ﬁne-scale road net, which in turn is connected to the major radial (and ring road, if present) transportation network. Various factors affect whether development is dispersed or compact (Yaro et al. 1990, Troy 1995, Theobold and Hobbs 1998). For instance, the use of septic systems for human wastewater facilitates dispersed residential development. In contrast, in Australia, Germany and certain other nations, homes in a development near a city cannot be built until after the sewer and other utilities have been installed, an effective way to create compact growth and neighborhoods. With a percieved ﬁnancial gain, typically any town or municipality can expand, whereas in Britain, to protect especially valuable land, many communities receive a government subsidy not to expand. The much-discussed causes of urbanization bear mention since some strongly affect the location and degree of development (Theobold and Hobbs 1998, Hansen 2002, Hall 2002, Burgi et al. 2004). Consider a large ﬂood or cyclone (hurricane) or earthquake that causes extensive building destruction (e.g., San Francisco 1906, New Orleans 2005). The area destroyed is usually rebuilt, though perhaps in a form better able to deal with a repeat disturbance. Some of the residents affected, however, may relocate to a more secure location outside the metropolitan area. Or consider rising sea level associated with climate change. Low-lying urban areas near coasts may become largely inundated, causing some residents and businesses to relocate to the outskirts of the city (e.g., Bangkok, San Diego/Tijuana). Immigration may stimulate urbanization around certain communities where arrivals from particular nations or cultures wish to aggregate. Immigrants arriving without ﬁnancial resources often live in squatter settlements within a city or near its perimeter (Perlman 1976, Main and Williams 1994), and may later move outward as land prices rise. Transportation corridors, both radial and ring-road, are especially associated with urbanization. For instance, adding a radial highway, or even new trafﬁc lanes to an existing one, is apt to produce an urbanized bulge in that direction. Constructing a ring highway around a metro area facilitates concentric-zone or dispersed development over extensive areas. Models for urbanization

Since the causes of urbanization vary widely and numerous recognizable repeated patterns are produced by the process, modeling has been frequently used to analyze such a complex system. A sampling of several types of models to understand urban expansion is outlined below. Much of the literature focuses on

Land-change patterns and models the causes, mechanisms, and processes of urbanization. An example is the set of spatial processes, i.e., perforation, dissection, fragmentation, shrinkage, and attrition/disappearance, that act on the existing land mosaic to produce changing landscape patterns (Forman 1995, McIntyre and Hobbs 1999, Lindenmayer and Fischer 2006). In contrast, a prime interest here is to provide a foundation and framework to understand the implications of different urbanization patterns. This will facilitate analyses of urban regions worldwide later in the chapter. Furthermore, we will attempt to identify the optimum urbanization pattern for people and nature. Concentric zones around a population center are the usual starting point for modeling land-use pattern and change (Christaller 1933, Losch 1954, Covich 1976, Haggett et al. 1977, Antrop 2000), an approach based on central-place theory and its different-width zones of inﬂuence. Population centers or nodes are interconnected by transportation routes and a hierarchy of nodes (village to city) and routes (local roads to major highways) develops. Competition for space among population nodes produces a regular pattern sometimes reminiscent of, and modeled as, a multi-scale hierarchy of hexagons. Elaborations and competing models have inevitably evolved (De Blij 1977, Forman and Godron 1986), including: a sector model of land-uses organized like wedge-shaped pieces of a pie; a multi-nodal model with separated growth nodes superimposed on sectors or concentric zones; and multiple star-shaped nodes in a hierarchical pattern produced by heterogeneity of the natural environment, regional history, and communication networks (Antrop 2000). A ‘‘rotating-sector model” where land uses rotate or alternate in pie-shaped slices around a point mimics the open-ﬁeld landscape in Europe’s Iron Age (Orwin and Orwin 1967, Rackham 1980, Forman and Godron 1986), as well as a sequence for forest cutting (Harris 1984, Peterken et al. 1992). Many other spatial models of change have been used in landscape ecology (Baker 1989, Sklar and Costanza 1990, Zonneveld and Forman 1990, Mladenoff 2005, Verboom and Wamelink 2005). Several early types of urban-growth models, some mathematical, link transportation and land use (Forman et al. 2003, Berling-Wolff and Wu 2004): (1) gravity models for interaction between cities; (2) location-of-work models; (3) journeyto-work models; and (4) 1960s transportation models for Detroit and Chicago, still used in the USA to evaluate potential regional air-pollution effects. Newer approaches offer a richness of ways to think about changing land (Berling-Wolff and Wu 2004, Wiens and Moss 2005), though few have been directly used to model urbanization: (a) dynamic modeling techniques; (b) cellular automata; (c) spatial-statistics models; (d) GIS and visualization techniques; (e) ecological process models; (f) fractals (Milne 1991a, 1991b); (g) ecological energetics; (h) fuzzy-logic theory; and (i) neural-network theory. Another approach used in

203

204

Urbanization models and the regions a Colorado (USA) study found that the likelihood of development correlates better with local patterns of existing development (described by spatial transition models) than with the traditional factors of proximity to highways, towns, and urban areas (Theobold and Hobbs 1998). Simulation models that mimic changing landscape patterns offer particular promise for understanding urbanization (Franklin and Forman 1987, Li et al. 1993, Swanson et al. 1994, Collinge and Forman 1998, Forman and Mellinger 2000). Modeling mosaic sequences, i.e., changing spatial patterns, permits one to directly compare alternatives, and hence identify optimum or best options. This approach, which will be applied to urbanization sequences later in the chapter, is illustrated by the process for identifying the ecologically optimum spatial sequence for changing a large landscape from a more suitable land-use type (e.g., forest) to a less suitable type (e.g., desertiﬁed area). First a literature review of forest cutting, suburbanization, desertiﬁcation, agricultural spread, and other broad-scale phenomena pinpointed 30 actual mosaic sequences or changing spatial patterns in land transformation (Forman 1995, in collaboration with George F. Peterken). Five simple spatial models simulated the bulk of these land transformations: (1) edge model; (2) corridor model; (3) nucleus model; (4) few-nuclei model; and (5) dispersed-patches model. These mosaic-sequence models were directly compared by recording levels of several spatial attributes of ecological importance related to patch size, connectivity, and boundary length in a hypothetical landscape. The edge model, whereby parallel strips are progressively degraded from one side to the opposite side of the landscape, was found to be the best ecologically (it retained attributes of the more-suitable initial land type furthest through the land transformation process). In contrast, the dispersed-patches model, where degradation occurs in small patches evenly and progressively dispersed across the land, was worst ecologically. These results apply to most of the actual landuse transformations observed in landscapes worldwide. However, the edge model is not ideal. Two changes effectively create an ecologically better ‘‘jaws model” (Forman 1995, Forman and Mellinger 2000). First, instead of degrading parallel strips progressively from one side of the landscape, L-shaped strips beginning from two adjacent sides are progressively degraded toward the opposite corner (analogous to wide-open jaws moving across the land). Second, instead of creating a progressively larger continuous degraded area, scattered small patches and corridors to be protected across the land are established at the outset, and remain until the ﬁnal phase. Finally, one improvement in the jaws model makes what currently seems to be the ecologically optimum model for shaping landscape change, the so-called jawsand-chunks model (Forman and Collinge 1996, Forman 2002a). In the middle phase

Land-change patterns and models of the mosaic sequence (e.g., from 70 % to 20 % of the initial more-suitable land type), instead of progressively shrinking a single huge natural patch, a few large natural patches are created (to spread risk), which are then sequentially rather than synchronously shrunk and eliminated. Thus the overall jaws-and-chunks mosaic sequence resembles wide-open jaws progressively moving from a corner and consuming more-suitable land, then creating and sequentially removing chunks of suitable land in the middle phase, and ﬁnally consuming the last chunk and the scattered bits of suitable land in the last phase. Attributes for evaluating patterns and models

Change is the norm, a process illustrated by sunrise, spring, the ﬁrst snowfall, and a warthog consumed by a crocodile. Urbanization, like the warthog--crocodile transformation, has advantages and disadvantages. A town in an urban region becomes jammed with trafﬁc and loses its rural character, yet concurrently road access, cultural diversity, and economic opportunity grow. A wetland that cleans streams of pollutants and maintains rich biodiversity is drained, yet that loss eliminates malaria-carrying mosquitoes and reduces problems related to soggy soils in adjoining neighborhoods. Thus evaluating an urbanization pattern, or model of it, requires both identifying the most important variables affected, and balancing the pros and cons. The other key decision to make in choosing variables is how general or speciﬁc they should be. Speciﬁc detailed variables are more numerous and individually may provide more precise response patterns. But determining the right variables to measure and interpreting large numbers of dissimilar speciﬁc responses normally are extremely difﬁcult. Using broader indices that combine or integrate speciﬁc ones reduces the complexity of detail and thus may lead to discovering broad patterns. However, teasing apart the detailed causes or mechanisms may be difﬁcult. Nevertheless, a lucid big picture, as well as major variables and handles for planning, will probably never appear with a detailed-variables approach. Broader variables or indices are required for that. The process used in identifying ecologically optimum landscape change (see previous section) appears useful for analyzing urbanization. Rather than comparing the ﬁve mosaic sequences of landscape change using numerous speciﬁc ecological characteristics, such as species richness, stream structure, groundwater quality, interior species populations, and so forth, broader spatial attributes were measured for evaluating landscape change (Forman 1995). The ten spatial attributes chosen included total patch-interior area, grain size of the landscape, ability to cross the landscape, total boundary length, and patch density. Conveniently the spatial attributes fell into three broad useful categories: (1) patch size or landscape grain size; (2) connectivity; and (3) boundary length.

205

206

Urbanization models and the regions Based on considerable landscape ecology and other literature, numerous speciﬁc ecological characteristics were known to correlate with these broad spatial attributes. Therefore the limited number of broad spatial attributes served as convenient informative indices or surrogates for groups of detailed ecological characteristics. For comparing and evaluating alternative urbanization patterns, this twotiered approach, using broad spatial attributes as indicators of detailed ecological characteristics, appears promising. However, in the case of urbanization the attributes chosen must effectively measure effects on two key dimensions, natural systems and their human uses. Outward expansion of the built environment produces obvious effects in the urban-region ring, but also some effects within the metropolitan area that warrant evaluation. For example, a semi-natural area in the city is enriched by periodic arrivals of species from the countryside. If urbanization expands outward in concentric zones, the semi-natural area becomes progressively more isolated, less enriched by species arrivals, and more impoverished (Soule 1991). Also, concentric-zone urbanization outside of green wedges is likely to simply convert them into embedded elongated greenspace patches. That severs connection to surrounding countryside for species, and truncates recreational opportunities for people living nearby in the city. The degradation of both biodiversity and recreational use in patches progressively more embedded in urban land is widely illustrated: Torrey Pines in San Diego/Tijuana; Batu Caves in Kuala Lumpur; Stone Mountain in Atlanta; Mill Creek Park in Edmonton (Saley et al. 2003, Wein 2006); desert tortoise habitat in Las Vegas (Beatley 1994); and Montjuic in Barcelona (Boada and Capdevila 2000, Forman 2004a). Finally, the area of the urban-region ring itself is relevant in evaluating urbanization options. Outward urbanization in small urban regions (e.g., Philadelphia) may quickly reach the boundary of the urban region. In some cases an urban region boundary can expand outward, but in other cases it is constrained in place by an adjacent urban region or a high mountain range. Indeed, urbanization from a city may affect an adjacent urban region, and vice versa.

Four urbanization models From the range of urbanization patterns and models introduced in the previous section, and based on accumulated literature, map-and-image analyses and personal observations, four models emerged for evaluation. These four -(1) concentric zones; (2) satellite cities; (3) transportation corridors; and (4) dispersed sites -- are quite different, and may represent nearly all major global trends in outward urbanization pattern (Figure 8.2). The four core models have

Four urbanization models

Figure 8.2 Four major spatial models of urbanization spread. Metropolitan area is the central circle; small open circles in upper right are satellite cities including their adjacent built area. As illustrated in a model, the total area urbanized after each of three time stages equals approximately 1.5 times, 2 times, and 3 times the initial metropolitan-area size. For illustration convenience in lower right, each new developed area equals about 2.5 % of the initial metro area. See text for quantitative rules (algorithms) of urban expansion.

parallels, both in mosaic sequence and analytic approach, to the edge, nuclei, corridor, and dispersed models used to understand landscape change (Forman 1995). In the succeeding sections, these urbanization models will be applied in some detail to two case studies (Mexico City, Nantes), and then more broadly to all of the 38 cities. A few key assumptions or parameters apply to all four models. The mosaic sequences or land-cover changes for each model are illustrated at three stages or time periods, i.e., when the total urbanized area reaches: (1) 1.5 times, (2) 2 times, and (3) 3 times the initial size of the metropolitan area (an increase in built area

207

208

Urbanization models and the regions by 50 %, 100 %, and 200 %, respectively). Urbanization of course produces quite different patterns around different cities, and tends to occur in pulses rather than at a constant rate. The three stages or levels of urbanization chosen are based, in part, on several US and Canadian cities that showed a 1.5 to 2 times increase in built area in a recent two-decade period (Forman et al. 2003). Another consideration was the growing interest in raising the time horizon for urban plans from the characteristic 3, 5, 10, or 20 yr to the decades-to-generations timescale of sustainability. Additional model assumptions are important. All land, including mountains, parks, military bases, and large wetlands, can be urbanized; only major water bodies cannot be urbanized. Only two types of land cover exist in the models, built space and greenspace. No inﬁll building on greenspace patches or corridors enclosed in a metropolitan area occurs. A ﬁnal assumption applies to cities with green wedges, here deﬁned as greenspaces that project into a metropolitan area at least one-third of the radial distance to the city center. Since a strong reason normally exists for the persistence of a wedge, in the models existing greenspace wedge areas remain and cannot be urbanized. However, wedges are not extended outward as urbanization expands, so in certain models development beyond green wedges leaves them as elongated greenspace patches within an expanded metro area. The extreme complexity of existing greenspace boundaries and patchily distributed development around the 38 worldwide urban regions precluded the feasibility of precise computer mapping of mosaic sequences on the region maps (Color Figures 2--39). Consequently, precise areas were calculated for each model, and approximate areas and boundaries were hand-drawn on maps derived from the Color Figures with sites (pictograms) and most land covers removed. This provided an efﬁcient and effective way to directly visualize and compare the four broad urbanization models. The mosaic sequences of the concentric, satellite, transportation, and dispersed urbanization models (Figure 8.2) to be used below are outlined as follows.

Concentric-zones model mosaic sequence

All urbanization, except as noted above for green wedges, is adjacent to and evenly distributed around the metropolitan-area border. In the ﬁrst stage of the concentric-zones model (reaching 1.5 times the initial size of metro area), urbanization ‘‘parallels” the broad outline of major built lobes and intervening greenspaces (which are wide, irrespective of how far outward or inward they project) of the metropolitan area. Finer-scale lobes and coves of the metroarea border are ignored. In the second and third stages (2 times and 3 times,

Four urbanization models respectively), outward urbanization progressively smoothes the metro-area border creating a compact rounded or oval form. Satellite-cities model mosaic sequence

All urbanization occurs around a few (four in this case) satellite cities at equal rates and in concentric-zones form. Consequently, each satellite receives a quarter of the total urbanization at each stage, and the metropolitan area and its border remains unchanged. The selection of satellite cities for urbanization is governed by the following priorities in order. Satellites are: (1) in the four compass quadrants and relatively equidistant from one another; (2) in the outer half of an urban-region ring, i.e., nearer the urban-region boundary than the metro-area border; (3) connected to the metropolitan area by a main road; (4) chosen from existing small cities, or in their absence, towns. Some explanations for the priorities are helpful. The distribution of all other features, sites, and characteristics in the region was ignored in selecting satellite cities and main roads. For coastal cities, satellites are relatively equidistant though often not in four compass quadrants. Selecting satellites far from the metropolitan area means that the satellite and metro area remain separate as urbanization proceeds, and that the satellite-city model is clearly differentiated from the concentric-zones and dispersed-sites models. The presence of a main road between satellite city and metropolitan area helps make the satellite a logical place for regional urban growth, and enhances direct comparison of the satellite-cities model with the transportation-corridors model which uses the same main roads. Finally, small cities may be better prepared for urban expansion than are towns, due to the presence of urban infrastructure, park system, and administrative structures. Transportation-corridors model mosaic sequence

All urbanization occurs adjacent to a few (four in this case) main radial highways connecting the metropolitan area with satellite cities, and progressively extends at equal rates outward from the metro area. From a highway, development extends outward in parallel bands, half on each side. Transportation routes connect the metro area with the relatively equidistant satellite cities selected in the satellite model. If no main road exists, a straightline route is established connecting a satellite city either to an existing main road at a logical point or directly to the metro area. This is consistent with the expectation that if a satellite city grows, either existing secondary roads are likely to be upgraded or a new road will be built to the metropolitan area.

209

210

Urbanization models and the regions For the transportation-corridors model, the distance from metro-area border to the satellite city is divided into three equal segments. In the ﬁrst time stage (reaching 1.5 times metro area), the road segment nearest the metro area receives twice as much development as the middle segment, which in turn receives twice as much as does the farthest road segment near the satellite. In the ﬁnal third stage (3 times metro area) all three road segments receive the same amount of development. The second intermediate stage (reaching 2 times) is half way between the ﬁrst and third stages in distributing development along the transportation corridor. Thus in the model, 41 % of the urbanization occurs along the road segment nearest the metro area, 32 % along the middle segment, and 27 % along the distant segment. This mosaic sequence of progressively extending outward, both radially from the metro area and in parallel bands from the highway, reﬂects the initial prominence (or source effect) of the metro area followed by the growing prominence of strip development along the road and inﬂuence of the satellite city.

Dispersed-sites model mosaic sequence

All urbanization occurs in equal-sized small patches dispersed outside the metropolitan area, and number of development patches per time period decreases with distance from the metro-area border. This dispersed-patch, lowdensity development model mimics sprawl. For the model, ﬁve ‘‘concentric” bands around the metropolitan area are outlined, somewhat analogous to zones in the concentric-zones model. Band sizes are scaled to the initial metro-area size, so the area of the ﬁrst band equals half the metro area, and area of each of the four outer bands equals the metro area. The size of development patches is also scaled to the metro-area size, reﬂecting an assumed rough correlation between city size and average development size. In the model, each patch of development equals 2.5 % of the initial metro area. Doubtless this is much larger than reality, but it signiﬁcantly facilitates calculation and mapping, and effectively illustrates the dispersed-sites model in contrast with the other urbanization models. The ﬁrst time stage (which reaches 1.5 times the metro area) distributes the small dispersed patches as follows: 50 % in band one, 25 % in band two, and 25 % in band three. The second stage (2 times the initial metro area) distributes 25 % of the development patches in each of the bands one, two, three, and four. The ﬁnal third stage (reaching 3 times) distributes 25 % of the patches in each of bands one, three, four, and ﬁve. Development patches are dispersed within a band and between bands so that they are relatively similar distances apart.

Models applied to case studies Thus at the end of the third ﬁnal stage the innermost band one is 100 % developed, band two 50 %, band three 37.5 %, band four 25 %, and the outermost band ﬁve is 12.5 % developed. The innermost band in this dispersed model is completely urbanized after the third stage, just as the equal-sized inner zone of the concentric model is fully developed after the ﬁrst stage.

Models applied to case studies What can we discover by applying the four urbanization models just described to the patterns of real cities? Which is the best way to spread outward -as concentric zones, satellite cities, transportation corridors, or dispersed sites? Which is worst? The answers here must be based on sustaining natural systems and their human uses. To answer these questions, this section examines two urban regions in some detail, and the following section compares all 38 urban regions more broadly. Mosaic sequences generated by the four models are ﬁrst mapped on the urban regions of Mexico City and Nantes (France). Mexico City has a large population (8 590 000) and a metropolitan area of 1606 km2 . Nantes is relatively small in both population (278 000) and metro area (171 km2 ). Then the four major urbanization options are directly compared by recording the amount of key sites or areas (Color Figures 22 and ) affected at each stage for each model. Two of the many nature-and-people variables on the urban region maps are selected for evaluating the urbanization models for these cities: (1) biodiversity sites, and (2) rivers/major streams. Biodiversity sites (described in Chapter 5) are simply counted. The second variable refers to the total length of rivers and major streams in the region that are surrounded (to c. 3 kilometers on each side) by natural vegetation. In short, the urbanization options are evaluated using four alternative models times three stages of urbanization times two urban regions times two variables of importance for natural systems and human uses. Maps of the four mosaic sequences in the Mexico City region are strikingly different (Figure 8.3). Development in the concentric model completely covers the area close to the city. The satellite-model development covers four small outer areas. The transportation-model development covers four long radial spokes or ﬁnger-like areas. And the dispersed-model development extends at low density across a large area around the city. The same results are evident for Nantes, a relatively small city (Figure 8.4). Chicago was originally included as a case study because, worldwide, it is a medium-size city in population (2 896 000), has the largest metropolitan area of all 38 regions analyzed (3993 km2 ) (see Table 5.1), and contains considerable sprawl. However, the huge metro area posed problems for applying the

211

212

Urbanization models and the regions

Figure 8.3 Four alternative urbanization models applied to the Mexico City Region: (a) Concentric rings; (b) satellite cities; (c) transportation corridors; and (d) dispersed sites. Scattered dots = urbanization in ﬁrst time stage; shading = second stage; dense dots = third stage. See Figure 8.2, Color Figure 22, and text.

urbanization models, so Chicago is only brieﬂy included in this section. To the north and northwest, the Chicago Region (Color Figure 13) is constrained by the region of nearby Milwaukee and by the State of Wisconsin. Only for the concentric-zones model will the three time stages logically ﬁt within Chicago’s urban region. For the satellite-city model and transportation-corridors model the ﬁrst stage ﬁts ﬁne, but the second stage (2 times the initial metro area) only ﬁts with ‘‘gerrymandering” (drawing a bizarre-shaped area so something ﬁts in), and the third stage (3 times) with extreme gerrymandering. For the dispersed-sites model, the ﬁrst stage ﬁts ﬁne, but the second and third stages cannot ﬁt at all (stage two requires an area 4 times and stage three 5 times the initial metro area). Relative to the metropolitan area extent, the urban region is simply too small.

Models applied to case studies

Figure 8.4 Four alternative urbanization models applied to the Nantes (France) Region: (a) concentric rings; (b) satellite cities; (c) transportation corridors; and (d) dispersed sites. Scattered dots = urbanization in ﬁrst time stage; shading = second stage; dense dots = third stage (for clarity, only included in upper left). See Figure 8.2, Color Figure 25, and text.

Of the 38 worldwide regions, two other cities, both in the USA, have an unusually large metropolitan area relative to the urban region so the dispersed-sites model will not ﬁt. Philadelphia, a medium-population-size city, has a particularly small urban region, and Atlanta, a small-population city, has an extensive metro area only exceeded in area by Chicago (see Table 5.1; Color Figures 3 and 27).

213

1st

2nd

Stages 3rd

Total

0

1 1

2 2

5 3

8

3

2.5 0

1

1st

Model ranking

Nantes, France

Model ranking

Mexico City

5

0 10

0 9

0 24

0

3

1 6

23

Rivers/major streams (km length affected by urbanization)

Model ranking

Nantes, France

Model ranking

Mexico City

Biodiversity sites (number affected by urbanization)

Urban region

Attribute measured

Concentric-zones model

4

11

0

0

2nd

Stages

4

14

0

1

3rd

14

48

0

2

2

4

1

1

Total

Satellite-cities model

0

1

0

1

1st

.5

1

0

2

2nd

Stages

.5

11

2

5

3rd

model

1 1

3

2

2.5

13

2

8

Total

Transportation-corridors

8

0

2

3

1st

5

0

1

4

2nd

Stages

15

2

3

3

3rd

28

2

6

10

4

2

4

4

Total

Dispersed-sites model

Table 8.1 Case study evaluation of urbanization models using two attributes in two urban regions. Mosaic sequence maps for Mexico City and Nantes (Figures 8.3 and 8.4) are superimposed on Color Figures 22 and 25, and the number of biodiversity sites and length of rivers/major streams covered by development is recorded for each of the three time stages portrayed by a model. For each attribute in each region the models are ranked from best to worst (1 to 4) based on the amount (low to high) of an attribute affected by urbanization, i.e., covered by development.

Urbanization options evaluated These apparent mismatches between metro-area and urban region may be harbingers of challenges ahead for the three cities. For both of the case studies, Mexico City and Nantes, biodiversity sites in the region are most affected or degraded in the dispersed-sites model (Table 8.1). They are least covered by development in the satellite-cities model. Thus the satellitecities model is deemed best, and dispersed-sites model worst, for biodiversity sites. Results for rivers/streams are different than those for biodiversity sites, and indeed effects on rivers/streams differ between regions. For Nantes the effects on biodiversity sites and rivers/streams are quite similar (Table 8.1). Based on these two variables, in this urban region the satellite and transportation models are better, and the dispersed and concentric ones worse strategies for urbanization. The reasons for some of these results are revealed in characteristics on the land. Differences for biodiversity-site effects seem related to a concentration of sites by water close to the Nantes metro area, and a scarcity of sites in the mid and outer agricultural portions of the Mexico City Region (Color Figures 22 and 25). Differences in river/stream effects appear related to the location of Nantes at the conﬂuence of rivers, in contrast to the lowered water-tables and dried-out river beds near Mexico City. Indeed cities began where dispersed natural systems were accessible in a day’s walk, many now being threatened by urbanization. In brief, the case studies have detected intriguing patterns in response to the alternative spatial models. Changing geometry is a central theme for understanding urbanization, but also speciﬁc physiographic and land-use patterns may help explain variations in response pattern. Yet how representative are the results based on two extremely different cities and two dissimilar variables? Broader response patterns at a global scale may transcend these detailed case studies.

Urbanization options evaluated with 18 attributes and 38 regions Several land-cover types and >40 site types represented by pictograms are mapped on the 38 urban regions (Chapter 5 and Color Figures 2--39). From these, 18 diverse, particularly informative attributes are selected for evaluating the four urbanization models applied to all the regions. Most of the other promising attributes are excluded because of limited sample sizes. Many of the attributes chosen are direct measures of suitable conditions for natural systems or their human uses (e.g., biodiversity sites, recreation sites, ﬂood hazard). Others are included as indirect measures known to correlate with direct factors (e.g., drainage area protection, development on nearby slopes, distance from major highway). The big picture emerges by examining a summary of the best-to-worst urbanization models for the 18 attributes of 38 urban regions (Table 8.2). Certainly

215

length)∗

Rivers/major streams (km

(% cover)

Nearby slopes facing city

Desert/desertiﬁed area∗

38

19

4

2.32

3.39

2

1.08

4

1.89

2.63

1

2

3.45

1

1

1

3

4

2.82

2.16

2.88

2.6

2.94

3

2

4

3

4

2.97

3.37

2.5

2

2.71

2.77

2.91

4

3

2

2

3

3

3

1.95

2

4

4

10

Grassland/pastureland∗

2.53

1

3.16

2.93

1.81

1

1

35

Forest/woodland∗

1.78

2.38

1.69

2.51

37 37

Biodiversity sites (%)

Recreation/tourism sites (%)

2

model ranking model ranking model

ranking

model

ranking

regions

2

worst average worst average

worst

average

worst

Attribute measured

Best to Attribute Best to Attribute

Best to

Attribute

Best to

average

model

model

Attribute

Dispersed-sites

corridors

of urban

model

model Number

Satellite-cities

Concentric-zones

Transportation-

Table 8.2 Summary effects of urbanization models on 18 attributes measuring natural systems and their human uses. Four alternative spatial models (Figure 8.2) were superimposed on the 38 urban region maps (Color Figures), and attributes covered by urbanization were counted or estimated at each of the three time stages in a model. Amount recorded is an index of effect or degradation due to urbanization, and the four models were ranked accordingly from best to worst (1 to 4) for an attribute in a region (see Appendix II with rankings for all attributes and regions). Number of urban regions measured excludes those where an attribute is absent or scarce on a region map. Attribute average ranking is for all urban regions measured. Best to worst model (Table columns) is based on comparing attribute average rankings. For asterisks, see further information in Appendix II.

14 30

Marine coast (km length)∗

Reservoirs/lakes

(%

2

3

4

1

2

2

3

2

1.4

1

2

1

3.57

1.95

1.45

2.27

2 3

2.71

1

5

2.44

3.2

4

1

2

2.2

2.75

3.08

2.33

2.04

2.14 1.54

2 2.5

Total number of 4s

10

38

38

38

15

10

2.38 2.63

Total number of 1s

Overall average

Other attributes combined∗

border (km)∗

Center city to metro-area

per km2)∗

Edge density (km length

region (high to low)∗

Degree of subdividing

highway (km)∗

Average distance to major

(% cover)

Market-gardening area

cover)∗

Drainage area for water 19

12

(% & shoreline km)∗

17

Major wetlands (% cover)

Flood hazard sites (%)

1

3

12

1

1

2

1

4

1

1

1

4

1

2.76

2.64

1.8

2

3

4

1.13

2.5

2.29

2.68

2.61

3.21

4

7

1

2

2

3

4

1

2

2

3

2

4

2.71

2.92

3.6

3

4

3

3.1

2.8

3.18

2.72

2.64

2.63

3

6

0

4

3

4

3

3

4

4

4

3

2.5

218

Urbanization models and the regions results vary from attribute to attribute (Appendix II also shows variability from region to region) as expected in a relatively comprehensive analysis. Nevertheless, the total number of 1s (best models) suggests that the satellite-cities and concentric-zones models are better than the other two (12 and 5 versus 1 and 0, respectively) (Table 8.2). The overall averages furthermore suggest that the satellite cities approach is the optimum (2.00 vs. 2.44, 2.64, and 2.92). Analogously the dispersed sites approach is apparently the worst for urbanization (no best-model 1s, six worst-model 4s, and the highest overall average, 2.92) (Table 8.2). Of the two intermediate cases, the concentric-zones model (ﬁve best-model 1s, two worst-model 4s, and overall average 2.44) is noticeably better than the transportation-corridors model (one best-model 1, seven worst-model 4s, and overall average 2.64). In essence, this broad analysis points to a rather clear ordering of the urbanization models from best to worst: (1) satellite cities; (2) concentric zones; (3) transportation corridors; and (4) dispersed sites. These results suggest two guiding principles: (1)

(2)

Regional urbanization in dispersed sites surrounding a metropolitan area, and to a lesser extent along transportation corridors, appears to cause extensive nature-and-human resource degradation, and thus should be avoided or minimized. Urbanization focused around satellite cities, which causes the least overall resource degradation, appears to be the best regional development pattern, though factors speciﬁc to a region may indicate a preference for combining satellite-city development with concentric-zone development adjacent to a metropolitan area.

While the worldwide patterns provide a framework or foundation for understanding and planning, differences from the central pattern can be detected for certain cities. Based on the distribution of best and worst urbanization models (sums of 1s and 4s for each region in Table 8.2), no urban region is strongly at variance with the worldwide pattern. Half of the regions closely ﬁt the broad pattern (Barcelona, Cairo, Canberra, East London, Edmonton, Erzurum, Kuala Lumpur, Moscow, Nairobi, Portland, Rahimyar Khan, Samarinda, Santiago, Sapporo, Seoul, Tegucigalpa, Tehran, and Ulaanbaatar). Two regions (Chicago, Bucharest) only vary from the core pattern by having slightly more 1s for the concentric-zones than the satellite-cities model, though this is not inconsistent with the second guiding principle above. Four regions (Mexico City, Nantes, London, Brasilia) diverge from the central pattern by having slightly more 4s in the concentric and satellite category than in the transportation and dispersed category (though 1s are concentrated in the concentric and satellite category, as expected). Philadelphia perhaps diverges most from the

Urbanization options evaluated worldwide pattern by having about the same number of 1s and 4s in both the concentric and satellite category and the transportation and dispersed category. Overall these divergences seem minor. The worldwide pattern for urbanization summarized in the guiding principles seems to apply well in virtually all the urban regions. Table 8.2 also shows no correlation between urbanization-model response pattern (distribution of best and worst models) and either broad geographic area (Europe, Africa, Latin America, etc.) or city population size (see Table 5.1). These results parallel those found for numerous attributes associated with nature, food, water, built systems, and built areas in the urban regions (Chapters 6 and 7). A closer look at the specific attributes, along with their response patterns, in this overall evaluation of urbanization options is useful (Table 8.2). The ﬁrst two attributes, biodiversity and recreation/tourism sites, in general are widely distributed small areas of nature-and-people importance. Forest, grassland, and desert attributes primarily measure the broad urbanization effect on natural land in urban regions. Nearby slopes facing a city have diverse implications from aesthetics to landslides, erosion, sedimentation, city air ventilation, and proximity of species-source habitats. Six water-related attributes (rivers/major streams, major wetlands, ﬂood hazard, marine coast, reservoirs/lakes, and drainage area for water supply) cover an extensive set of natural-systems-and-people issues central to the present and future of urban regions. Market-gardening areas in proximity to a city also reﬂect a range of beneﬁts from food to economics and clean air. Distance from major highway reﬂects overall transportation costs and infrastructure effects on the land. Three attributes measuring diverse implications of urbanization (subdividing a region, edge density, and average distance from city center to metro-area border) produce identical patterns for all regions, which basically result from geometry (algorithms) in the four urbanization models. Subdividing a region with strip development disrupts regional connectivity for species movement. Edge density is an index of numerous effects of built areas on natural systems (Chapter 7). Average distance from city center to metro-area border measures how isolated city residents and city parks are from the surrounding countryside. Finally, ‘‘other attributes considered” is simply a mix of dissimilar characteristics measured -- greenbelt, urban growth boundary, Native Peoples’ land, aquaculture, and ﬁre hazard -- each with a fairly limited sample size. In short, this array of attributes evaluated (Table 8.2), like those highlighted in Chapters 6 and 7, nicely illustrates the regional focus on natural systems and their uses for society. Especially high average rankings (1.0 to 1.9) or low rankings (3.0 to 4.0) for an attribute (Table 8.2) indicate considerable consistency, or low variability, in

219

220

Urbanization models and the regions results from region to region. Thus the satellite-cities model is consistently the best among regions for 10 of the 18 attributes (biodiversity sites, recreation/ tourism sites, nearby slopes facing cities, etc.). The dispersed-sites model, on the other hand, is consistently the worst among urban regions for seven of the attributes. Is there a single attribute, or two or three, that produces results similar to that for the whole set of 18 variables? Rivers/major streams and reservoirs/lakes are the only two attributes with the same best-to-worst (1, 2, 3, and 4) model results as for the whole set (Table 8.2). The actual averages, as well as the consistency in results across regions, for the rivers/streams attribute are closest to those of the total set. Measuring the length of rivers and major streams affected or degraded by development may be a particularly useful measure to differentiate mosaicsequence models and to evaluate the overall effects of urbanization. Assaying a global set of cities with 18 informative variables may seem ambitious, even sufﬁcient. Yet other variables or considerations may be important for the models as the following cases illustrate. Concentric-zones model: additional dimensions Expanding outward from a metropolitan area would likely increase the heat-island effect for cities where that is a problem. The concentric-zones trajectory would also be environmentally detrimental for nearby slopes facing a city, and would leave city center residents increasingly isolated from greenspace of the urban-region ring (Table 8.2). Models that eliminate greenspace wedges in a metro area, or alternatively, continue green wedges outward as urbanization proceeds, would be interesting. A bulges model instead of the concentric-zones model might produce little difference in response. However, if the bulges were on especially valuable greenspace, the concentric model would be better. Conversely, targeting development onto greenspace of low value should make the bulges approach even better than the concentric-zones model. Satellite-cities model: additional dimensions Concentrating growth around satellite cities is a dispersal process that may create new major cities in the outer urban-region ring where natural systems are most valuable. Or several rather than a few satellites could be nuclei for urbanization. This might create a pattern somewhat akin to dispersed sites, with a relatively extensive associated road network. The satellite-cities approach would normally be the best of the four models for maintaining greenspace wedges, a greenbelt, or an urban growth boundary. A long-range plan for the Barcelona Region recommended concentrating expected future development around ﬁve satellite cities (Color Figure 6) (Forman

Urbanization options evaluated 2004a). Selecting the satellite-cities approach and determining which cities should become nodes for urbanization were both done after the urban region had been analyzed, and areas valuable for natural systems and human uses had been mapped. The satellite-cities approach could avoid especially valuable areas and seemed least likely to cause signiﬁcant environmental degradation. Similarly, the particular satellites were chosen from the small cities present in the Barcelona Region in part to minimize environmental problems. In the alternative-models approach of this chapter where land of any sort is simply covered with development, the satellite-cities model emerged as best overall. No analysis of the relative value of resources and land uses across the region was involved. The analytical approach and results of the Barcelona plan reminds us that speciﬁc satellite cities can be chosen to minimize environmental degradation. As in the Barcelona case, satellites can also be chosen to include distinctiveness in character and enhance economic diversity, which provide ﬂexibility and stability for the region as a whole. Finally, extensive growth around outer satellite cities is likely to affect nearby areas outside the urban region. Transportation-corridors model: additional dimensions The radial transportation-corridors approach (especially without a ring highway) may facilitate the maintenance of green wedges or a ring of parks by a metropolitan area. Several transportation corridors, instead of a few, would create lines of development that markedly subdivide a region. They would also tend to catalyze widespread ﬁne-scale road networks supporting development, somewhat analogous to the dispersed-sites case. Wide strips of development along highway corridors usually degrade streams and rivers crossing the region, and block movement patterns of certain key wildlife species, leaving them semi-isolated in smaller sections of the region. Overcoming these subdividing problems involves the establishment and protection of greenspaces that interrupt the strip development at appropriate intervals, as well as wide underpasses and/or overpasses along the highway for the undegraded passage of water courses and wildlife (Forman et al. 2003, Iuell et al. 2003, Trocme et al. 2003). Indeed, the transportation-corridors approach poses special problems for maintaining major greenspace corridors that interconnect an urban region as a whole for wildlife and walkers, and that connect effectively with adjoining regions in, e.g., the four cardinal directions. Dispersed-sites model: additional dimensions Results of the urbanization analyses are consistent with the awkward or unsatisfactory component of the basic sprawl concept (Chapter 1). Still, many variants of the dispersed-sites model may occur, including: a much higher density of tiny development patches; heterogeneity in patch size; patches dispersed

221

222

Urbanization models and the regions further out from the metro area; and patches aggregated in various ways. Since this model mimics sprawl, these variants should be grist for modeling and discovering solutions for sprawl. Finally, the four contrasting urbanization models were developed after considering a wide range of actual urban-growth patterns plus diverse types of possible change models (see preceding sections). The relatively clear-cut results from the four models seem to capture the primary patterns and alternatives for urbanization. Still, modiﬁcations of a pattern and different patterns warrant evaluation. In attempting to mimic reality with a model, selecting the most informative variables and determining the fewest that are sufﬁcient are challenges. Avoiding oversimpliﬁcation and avoiding misleading results are goals. Also excessive complexity is to be avoided so that the model enhances understanding and is ultimately useful for society. Future research and application will determine how well the four urbanization models (Figure 8.2) meet these goals. Most urban regions probably manifest two or more of the urbanization patterns, so evaluating combinations of the four core models seems promising. Thus combining concentric zones and satellite cities, or transportation corridors and satellite cities models, would be interesting. Even combining three options, e.g., dispersed sites with both transportation corridors and satellite cities might be informative. Landscape ecologists, urban geographers, and many others have much expertise to offer, from empirical measurement ‘‘on the ground” to modeling of diverse urbanization patterns. Identifying and evaluating the few basic patterns in a useful form for planners, ecologists, policymakers, and the public is an important step toward creating urban regions that sustain nature and us. Several other dimensions of urbanization, from sea-level-rise effects to putting the model results into action, are introduced in Chapter 12. The core models and the guiding principles added to our repertoire in this chapter also remind us that, paraphrasing Isaac Newton, we mainly build on the shoulders of giants before us. Therefore, in the next chapter we turn to many principles already on the table for us to use.

9

Basic principles for molding land mosaics

An artist can translate a compelling inspiration into a painting or object that inspires the public, and even pleases the artist. In addition to inspiration and materials, skill is a key to success. Skill might be thought of as a set of principles, knowing what works and what doesn’t -- color mixtures, composition, types of lines, and much more. The artist has a palette of principles. When mixed with imagination and experimentation, they greatly increase the chance of a successful or inspiring result. If one were designing wheels, using the known principles of wheel design greatly decreases the chance of producing square, oval, or one-spoked wheels. No matter how beautiful or well-made they are, such wheels do not work. If the land or an urban region is being planned or changed, we do not start from scratch. We use principles, subconsciously or speciﬁed. Water ﬂows downward so streams are not designed ﬂowing to hilltops. Trees require oxygen for their roots so we do not plant trees in water. People need security when asleep at night, so they are surrounded by shelter. Using known principles helps protect society from poor quality, and unethical, work. Rather than simply ideas or hypotheses or even concepts, principles can be thought of as solid rigorous guidelines, a basis or foundation for planning and action. They do not apply everywhere anytime as we expect a universal law to do, but the often-considerable direct or indirect evidence supporting them is a basis for their widespread application (Dramstad et al. 1996, Forman 2004a). Principles alone, however, lead to generic solutions. Monotonous, out-of-date, or lack-of-creativity might describe designs and plans using only principles on our palette. Instead, as for the artist whom we so admire, principles are mixed with imagination and inspiration to produce solutions for the land. Results are both dependable and creative.

223

224

Basic principles for molding land mosaics This chapter is a palette or treasure chest of principles. All deal with land use, most with nature and people, and many with urban regions. They are not to be blindly followed. If your guidebook says that bears avoid the habitat type you are in and you see a bear moving rapidly toward you, it is wise to think beyond the guideline. Principles are to be creatively and intelligently used. The bear example emphasizes that planning or action is also based on characteristics of the land. Land is not a blank canvas or a homogenous space. Spatial patterns, as well as ﬂows and movements across them, are always present. The big challenge, and opportunity, is the integration of those existing land patterns with both principles and creativity. The goal is to improve the pattern and set of ﬂows, and have improvements continue into the future. Thus a set of principles useful for land-use planning and derived from a range of ﬁelds is presented. Overall these are statements of importance, of wide applicability, and with predictive ability. All have at least some empirical evidence, ﬁt with indirect lines of evidence, and in some cases also have a known theoretical basis. Other scholars and planners, of course, would pinpoint a somewhat different list, including additional points. Indeed the reader can doubtless add to the list. Nevertheless, the bulk of the principles here seem to represent a consensus within each of the ﬁelds represented. Cutting-edge hypotheses and results are absent, as are narrowly focused principles with limited applicability. As always, both ongoing research and special attributes in a region dictate caution in applying or extrapolating a principle. Not surprisingly, with a focus on natural systems and their uses in a region, landscape ecology is a particularly important contributor to the list. Yet principles are also drawn from transportation, community development, economics, conservation biology, water resources, and other ﬁelds. Principles are conveniently placed into ﬁve broad categories, though clearly much overlap exists among the categories: (1) patch sizes, edges, and habitats; (2) natural processes, corridors, and networks; (3) transportation modes; (4) communities and development; and (5) land mosaics and landscape change.

Patch sizes, edges, and habitats Principles in this ﬁrst category focus on spatial pattern or structure of the land, especially relative to nature or greenspace. Consistent with the basic idea of nature conservation as a priority for society, rather than attempting to protect each species, the emphasis is on landscape patterns. The list of principles leans heavily on those presented in Schonewald-Cox and Bayless (1986), Salvesen (1994), Forman (1995, 2004a), Dramstad et al. (1996), Mitsch and Gosselink (2000), Farina (2005), Dale and Haeuber (2001), Opdam et al. (2002), Gutzwiller (2002),

Patch sizes, edges, and habitats France (2003), Lindenmayer and Burgman (2005), Groom et al. (2006), Wiens and Moss (2005), Perlman and Milder (2005), Fischer et al. (2006), and Lindenmayer and Fischer (2006). Chapter 4 elaborates on some of the principles, even suggesting others. These principles are listed in four groupings: (1) patch size and edge; (2) natural habitats for conservation; (3) species-focused conservation; and (4) wetlands. Patch size and edge

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

(F)

(G)

Large-patch benefits. Large patches of natural vegetation are the only structures in a landscape that protect aquifers and interconnected stream networks, sustain viable populations of many interior species, provide core habitat and escape cover for most large-home-range vertebrates, and support near-natural disturbance regimes and plants dependent on them. Edge width of a natural community. Edge width, which largely results from penetration of wind, solar energy, and human inﬂuence into a natural community, is the distance with signiﬁcant effects on sensitive ecological variables, such as desiccation, seedling mortality, herbaceous species, and upper soil layer conditions. Edge and interior species. A more convoluted natural-vegetation patch, or one that has been subdivided into two smaller patches, will have a higher proportion of edge habitat with slightly more generalist edge species, but will contain signiﬁcantly fewer and smaller populations of interior species, including those of conservation importance. Small-patch benefits. Small natural-vegetation patches scattered across a less-suitable matrix act as stepping stones enhancing the movement of some species, provide some protection for widely scattered uncommon species, and, if near a large patch, may enhance species richness and movement associated with the large patch. Populations in small patches. Small patches, especially if isolated, tend to have smaller populations which ﬂuctuate more over time, more inbreeding and resulting genetic deﬁciencies, and therefore a greater chance of local extinction or disappearance. Human impacts and protected areas. Closing spur roads and roads that bisect the interior of a large protected patch, and concentrating recreational opportunities and facilities for people in the edge portion of a protected area are effective ways to protect resources, especially in the interior of a large protected patch. Boundary characteristics. Boundaries or edges of a habitat, including their three-dimensional structure, distinctive microclimate and soil, and high

225

226

Basic principles for molding land mosaics

(H)

vegetational density and species richness, affect adjacent habitats by functioning as a source of effects and as a ﬁlter of movements between the habitats. Degradation of a natural community or ecosystem. Degradation by human activity reduces vertical and horizontal structure, such as foliage layers, tree holes, vegetation gradients, and soil horizons, and reduces functional interactions and ﬂows, including food webs, water ﬂows, and mineral nutrient cycles. Natural habitats for conservation

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

(F)

(G)

(H)

Number of large patches. Consistent with risk-spreading theory, if each large patch of a particular habitat type contains almost all of its characteristic species in a landscape, then two or three large patches are probably sufﬁcient to sustain almost all the species, but if each patch has a limited portion of the characteristic species present, four or ﬁve large patches are probably required. Especially valuable patches. Natural vegetation patches that play a particularly important role in the overall system (such as a key link in the landscape pattern), or contain unusual or distinctive characteristics (such as an important aquifer or rare habitat), are especially valuable for minimizing degradation. Economically productive areas. Remnant natural habitats in particularly productive areas especially merit habitat expansion, because they tend to be rare and to contain many rare species that thrive on the rich environmental conditions. Habitat diversity. Increasing the number of habitat types, primarily by including more substrate and microclimatic conditions or secondarily by maintaining more successional stages (e.g., fallow ﬁelds, shrubby areas), increases the number of native species present. Tree holes and dead wood. Dead wood, both standing and fallen, and cavities in tree trunks tend to be scarce in built areas, yet are especially important for biodiversity beneﬁts. Rare and representative habitats. By protecting reasonable numbers and sizes of rare and representative habitats, nature (including the bulk of the native species present) should persist long term. A small isolated habitat. To protect a small isolated habitat long term typically requires the presence of an important role played by the habitat within a larger landscape pattern, and may also require widespread public recognition. Ecology, cost, and threat. Successful long-term land protection particularly focuses on location of the land relative to other protected lands,

Patch sizes, edges, and habitats plus three characteristics subject to rapid change: (1) present ecological attributes of the land; (2) land cost and subsequent management cost; and (3) threats (urgency) to the land. Species-focused conservation

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

Species of small isolated habitats. To provide some long-term protection for species of dispersed small distinct habitats requires protection of extensive heterogeneous areas, or of numerous small sites, or of several large patches with enough connections across the landscape that most species distributions will be included in the large patches. Species ‘‘perception” and conservation priority. Animals and plants ‘‘perceive” and respond to different-sized structures and patterns, and thus successful conservation focuses on species especially sensitive to large structures and patterns, which are most likely to be lost or degraded by human activities in the landscape. Keystone species. Landscape patterns that protect keystone species (those with a disproportionately large effect on ecosystem function relative to their abundance or biomass), particularly predators, are likely to be especially effective in protecting biodiversity. Species extinction proneness. A landscape pattern that enhances the following species types -- low mobility animal, large body size, low reproductive rate, top of food chain, large home-range size, hunted species, small population size, habitat specialist, and strong dependence on another species -- reduces the chance of species loss. Invasive species. If an invasive non-native or feral species degrades a natural habitat, and ecological succession and other natural processes are unlikely to be an effective control, then carefully researched human control of the species is normally appropriate to restore the habitat. Wetlands

(A)

(B)

Hydrologic functions of wetlands. When not ‘‘full” of water, wetlands act as sponges slowing down and absorbing water ﬂows, and then slowly releasing water through evaporation to air, percolation into ground, and runoff into surface water-bodies, that effectively reduces downstream peak ﬂows and ﬂooding (Figure 9.1). Pollutants and wetlands. Particulate pollutants settle out in wetlands, dissolved substances are absorbed by plant roots, diverse pollutants are ﬁltered as water moves through soil, and some pollutants are broken down by microorganisms, that together results in cleaner water ﬂowing out of a wetland.

227

228

Basic principles for molding land mosaics

Figure 9.1 Tidal wetland and river spanned by multilane highway bridge which facilitates wildlife and ﬂoodwater passage. Note: habitat heterogeneity in the ﬂoodplain; small meandering channel on mudﬂat; picnic recreation area on left; and continuous woody vegetation corridor along ﬁeld that reduces agricultural runoff and enhances wildlife movement. Dover/Smyrna, Delaware, USA. Photo courtesy of US Federal Highway Administration.

(C)

(D) (E)

(F)

Plants in wetlands. Because the water table level is close to the irregular soil surface in a wetland, considerable spatial microheterogeneity and temporal change in water conditions are the norm, often producing a high diversity and biomass of adaptable, seasonally changing species. Wetland complexes. A connected cluster or complex of wetlands normally provides the highest wetland biodiversity and stability. Ephemeral ponds. Ephemeral ponds (or vernal pools) which dry out for a period most years often contain a concentration of both rare plants that thrive with alternating inundation and dry soil, and rare animals which either burrow deeply into the soil during dry periods, or seasonally migrate some distance from and to the pond. Wetland surroundings. Natural vegetation surrounding a wetland or ephemeral pond reduces sediment and other pollutant inputs, and is

Natural processes, corridors, and networks

(G)

(H)

(I)

intensively used by many wetland animals, which also tend to move longer distances in the direction of other wetlands and suitable habitat. Wetland restoration and creation. Restoration is typically more successful than wetland creation, and establishing the right hydrologic conditions and ﬂows is normally more important for the formation and stability of wetlands than are soil conditions and vegetation, that will develop naturally over time. Wetland as pollutant filter. Wetlands tend to be effective ﬁlters for waterborne suspended sediment, phosphorus, and biological-oxygen-demand (BOD), but less so for bacteria and nitrogen, unless the water ﬂows a long distance through a wetland. Rare species in wetlands. Because wetland removal by drainage and ﬁlling has been so pervasive in urban regions, the wetlands remaining typically have among the highest concentrations of rare species in the region.

Natural processes, corridors, and networks This second set of principles emphasizes function, the ﬂows and movements across space, that in effect describes how the land or region works. Natural systems are the focus. The following references are especially useful for these principles: Forman (1995, 2004a), Dramstad et al. (1996), Harris et al. (1996), Ludwig et al. (1997), Beier and Noss (1998), Burel and Baudry (1999), Bennett (2003), Turner et al. (2001), Wiens (2002), Groom et al. (2006), Lindenmayer and Burgman (2005), Hilty et al. (2006), and Lindenmayer and Fischer (2006). Chapter 4 also contains insight on this subject. Four groupings of principles are present: (1) natural processes and species movement; (2) water ﬂows; (3) natural corridors and the matrix; and (4) natural networks. Natural processes and species movement

(A)

(B)

Form and function. Compact forms effectively conserve internal resources, convoluted forms enhance interactions with the surroundings, and network forms serve as an internal transport system, so that a natural vegetation patch with a rounded core, some curvilinear boundaries, and a few long lobes or attached corridors provides a range of ecological beneﬁts. Interactions between patches. Species interactions (movements) are greatest between a small patch or site and its adjacent land uses, somewhat lower with nearby patches of the same type, and lowest with distant patches of a different type.

229

230

Basic principles for molding land mosaics (C)

(D)

(E)

(F)

Metapopulation arrangement. Human activities in the urban region often subdivide a large natural population into spatially separate small populations with few individuals moving among them (a metapopulation), in which case a few large natural patches, each surrounded by small patches, is an excellent design for sustaining metapopulations. Metapopulation dynamics. Species disperse outward from a large patch, providing genetic variation and reducing local extinction in nearby small patches, whereas species that disappear from a small patch are less likely to return or recolonize, if the patch is isolated or surrounded by an inhospitable matrix. Movement among small patches. For a species that inhabits and moves among a few small patches, loss of a patch tends to reduce population size, movement, and stability. Straight and convoluted boundaries. A straight boundary tends to have more species movement along it, whereas a convoluted boundary with lobes and coves provides diverse wildlife habitat and facilitates boundary crossing between adjacent habitats. Water flows

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

Surface runoff. Rainwater washing surfaces and soils of a land mosaic carries dissolved chemicals, erodes surface particles containing chemicals, and rapidly ﬂows as stormwater into and along channels to cause a pulse of ﬂooding, and to deposit its contents in gullies, streams, lakes, and other water-bodies (Figure 9.1). Groundwater flows. Surfacewater carries dissolved chemicals down into the ground where they may accumulate and contaminate the typically slow-moving water of an aquifer, or groundwater may be partially cleaned by ﬂowing through soil or wetlands to water bodies on the surface such as streams and lakes. Stream corridor. A (‘‘blue-green”) ribbon of dense natural vegetation that covers the ﬂoodplain, both hillslopes, and a strip of interior habitat on both adjoining upland areas will normally provide protection against erosion, dissolved mineral nutrients, and toxic chemicals from the matrix, especially if the vegetation widens to surround entering intermittent channels. Vegetation along small channels. Vegetation protecting intermittent channels and small (ﬁrst-order) streams is especially important for minimizing downstream peak ﬂows and ﬂooding. Floodplain or riparian vegetation. Dense ﬂoodplain vegetation, especially shrub cover, provides friction to reduce downstream ﬂooding, provides shade, dead leaves and wood to enhance ﬁsh and other aquatic

Natural processes, corridors, and networks

(F)

(G)

(H)

organisms, and increases the rich ﬂoodplain habitat diversity of wetland depressions, streambanks, sandy ridges, and surface microheterogeneity. River-ladder pattern. A ‘‘river ladder” to protect rivers has vegetation strips along both sides of a ﬂoodplain to facilitate wildlife movement and protect hillslopes and adjacent upland, plus a sequence of large vegetation patches crossing the ﬂoodplain that reduce ﬂooding, trap sediment, contribute wood for downriver ﬁsh habitat, provide organic matter for aquatic food chains, and maintain diverse habitats with rare ﬂoodplain species. Drainage basin and stream corridor. The hydrologic, physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of a stream/river can be modiﬁed or mitigated by the riparian or stream corridor, but are much more affected and effectively managed by the types and spatial arrangement of land use across the watershed or drainage basin. Aquifer water. Aquifer groundwater, which (except in limestone areas) moves very slowly and has little capacity to remove pollutants, is mainly kept clean by a complete cover of natural vegetation, particularly over its upslope portion. Natural corridors and the matrix

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

(F)

Corridor functions and their control. Width and connectivity are the primary controls on all ﬁve key roles or functions of natural-vegetation strips or corridors, i.e., conduit, ﬁlter (or barrier), source, sink, and habitat. Small patches attached to corridors. Small patches attached to natural corridors and networks provide ‘‘rest stops” for wildlife movement that, especially on long routes, typically increase the chance of a species reaching a destination. Gap in a corridor. The ability of an animal moving along a naturalvegetation corridor to cross a gap or break in the corridor especially improves as gap length relative to the spatial scale of species movement shortens, and with more suitable conditions in and around the gap. Stepping stones between large patches. For species movement between two large natural patches, a row of stepping stones (small patches) or a poorquality corridor is normally better than no corridor, but a cluster of stepping stones with an overall linear alignment provides alternative routes and is likely to be more effective. Habitat contrast. Greater habitat contrast or difference between a patch and a corridor or matrix decreases movement of species between the patch and an adjoining corridor or matrix, and hence across a landscape. Matrix heterogeneity. Microhabitat heterogeneity increases the total species pool of the matrix and its role as a source of species, and if

231

232

Basic principles for molding land mosaics heterogeneity is arranged as a (gradual) gradient, rather than being patchy, species movement is either greater or less depending on gradient orientation relative to direction of movement. Natural networks

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Major natural-vegetation network. The primary network (emerald network) of large natural patches and connecting corridors helps maintain distinct sections across a landscape, preventing coalescence of development and promoting a sense of community, local culture, and care for the land. Loops in a network. Loops or circuits in a network provide alternative routes for movement, thus reducing the effects of gaps and less suitable spots, and increasing the chance of successfully reaching a destination. Landscape connectivity. Most species evolved in highly connected heterogeneous natural landscapes, have had relatively little time to adapt to human fragmented ones, and occur in greater numbers (species richness) in more connected areas. Species dispersal. Since species disperse different distances and directions, a natural corridor and patch network with a relatively high average number of linkages per patch provides good dispersal opportunities which enhance the persistence of most species.

Transportation modes This third set of principles involves highways and roads, commuter-rail lines, and walking. Transportation is a core spatial attribute and plays a major functional role in the urban region. It is a key factor in economic investment and development, as well as natural systems and their use. The following references are particularly useful for the principles here: National Research Council (1997), Warren (1998), Cervero (1998), Forman and Alexander (1998), Forman and Deblinger (2000), Ravetz (2000), Bullard et al. (2000), Simmonds and Hack (2000), Calthorpe and Fulton (2001), AASHTO (2001), Benﬁeld et al. (2001), Willis et al. (2001), Forman et al. (2003), Forman (2004b), Dittmar and Ohland (2004), Handy (2005), Erickson (2006), Forman (2006), and Moore (2007). Also see Chapter 2. Four groupings are addressed: (a) highways; (b) commuter-rail lines and communities; (c) roads in communities; and (d) walking and park systems. Highways

(A)

Highway as source of effects. Wider and especially busier highways, as concentrated linear sources of ecological effects, increasingly alter local

Transportation modes

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

(F)

(G) (H)

(I)

hydrology, wetlands and streams, block animal movement across the landscape, subdivide natural populations into smaller populations, road-kill animals, and disperse air pollutants into the environment (Figure 9.1). Degradation zones by highway. Increased vehicular trafﬁc on highways creates wider adjacent zones of degraded animal communities (presumably due to trafﬁc noise), wider highways generally (often with more trafﬁc) are greater sources of non-native species, eroded earth material, stormwater contaminants, and atmospheric pollutants. Highway protection of the matrix. A more concentrated, safe, and efﬁcient transportation system to access resources, homes, and other human land uses is valuable for reducing dispersed human impacts on nature and natural systems across the landscape. Highway network. Busier and wider highway corridors increasingly reduce landscape connectivity and subdivide an urban region into sections, with a mesh size normally suitable for relatively separate small populations of large animals. Perforated highway corridor. Increasingly perforating a transportation corridor with passages, from tiny wildlife tunnels to culverts, underpasses, and overpasses, reduces habitat fragmentation by providing for relatively natural movements and ﬂows of wildlife and water. Closing roads. Progressively closing spur roads and low-usage roads in and by medium-to-large natural patches is an especially effective way to create large natural patches and their many important beneﬁts for nature and society. Adding radial-route capacity. Adding transportation capacity on a city’s radial route stimulates growth and development in that direction. Adding a ring road. Adding an outer ring road provides ﬂexibility in movement for suburban (peri-urban) residents and catalyzes growth and development over a broad outward zone. Trucking center. A truck (lorry) transportation terminal near the metroarea border facilitates the transfer of manufactured goods and agricultural products for long-distance trucks, as well as small-truck movement serving local farms, industries, markets and restaurants, in effect providing economic efﬁciency and better trafﬁc ﬂows on congested urban streets. Commuter-rail lines and communities

(A)

Commuter rail lines. Light or heavy rail lines and streetcars/trollies that extend outward, offering convenient service beyond the metro area,

233

234

Basic principles for molding land mosaics

(B)

provide greater modal (transportation types) ﬂexibility for suburban residents and help limit vehicular trafﬁc. Transit-oriented development. TOD that meshes mixed-use residentialshopping areas with local natural ecosystems within 800 m (half-mile) of a station on a commuter transit line has a higher proportion of people commuting to work on public transport, and also may have more walking, bicycling, and local shopping, a tighter community, and a greater sense of place by residents. Roads in communities

(A)

(B)

Traffic calming. Trafﬁc-calming techniques that slow vehicle movement increasingly provide safer, more convenient walking opportunities for children and the elderly, and enhance a sense of community in neighborhoods. Accessibility and local spaces. Road infrastructure which effectively provides for both accessibility and local community spaces and private spaces successfully addresses both broader social goals and narrower neighborhood and individual goals. Walking and park systems

(A)

(B) (C)

Park system. Providing routes for movement of people and/or species among parks changes a group of parks into a park system, with consequent beneﬁts to both nature and people. Greenspaces and neighborhoods. An effective urban park system has greenspaces conveniently walkable for residents of all neighborhoods. Sustainable park system. To establish a sustainable park system, each park and each connection is important, and both government and the public understand how the interdependent pieces ﬁt together to work as a whole.

Communities and development In this fourth area of principles, the focus is a community, an aggregation of interacting residents in a city, town, or village. Development emphasizes the spread of built areas, including economic investment across the land. Both communities in place and the process of development strongly interact with natural systems. In contrast to the preceding section on human movement patterns, the social and economic focus here is where people live. Principles here are largely extracted from Yaro et al. (1990), Sukopp and Hejny (1990), Bartuska (1994), Campbell (1996), Seddon (1997), Warren (1998), Donahue

Communities and development (1999), Atkinson et al. (1999), Ravetz (2000), Beatley (2000), Jacobi et al. (2000), Warner (2001), Willis et al. (2001), Macionis and Parillo (2001), Benﬁeld et al. (2001), Peiser (2001), White (2002), Grimm et al. (2003), LeGates and Stout (2003), Campbell and Fainstein (2003), Nassauer (2005), Handy (2005), Kellert (2005), Hersperger (2006), Clark (2006), Moore (2007), and Robert Yaro (personal communication). The emphasis is much more on land planning than on management of existing land (Atkinson et al. 1999, Willis et al. 2001, White 2002). Also see Chapter 2. Three subgroupings are useful for this topic: (a) locating development; (b) environment and community; and (c) social dimensions and sense of community.

Locating development

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

(F)

(G)

(H)

Development and low-ecological-value areas. Guiding potential growth and development to areas of low ecological value is a major step in protecting and sustaining natural systems. Concentrating or dispersing development. Concentrating rather than dispersing development greatly increases the protection of natural systems and reduces the dependence on transportation infrastructure and vehicular usage (Figure 9.2). Coalescence of communities. Preventing the coalescence of adjoining communities, e.g., with greenspace strips, helps maintain the identity and distinctiveness of each community. Mixed-use communities. Intermixing residential, commercial, and lightindustry areas in sections of a community reduces vehicular travel, but causes more nearby land-use conﬂicts than in single-use communities. Edge nodes of industry and employment. Concentrating light industry (and sometimes medium industry) in nodes on the edge of residential/commercial towns and small cities helps reduce both vehicular travel and land-use conﬂicts. Heavy industry centers. Aggregating compatible heavy industries on a site with efﬁcient water, power, and waste-disposal plus convenient public transport for nearby employees, away from major rivers/streams, and downwind of population centers and valuable nature, minimizes environmental problems and maximizes beneﬁts. Land prices. Overall, land prices decrease with distance from a city’s central business district, a pattern mainly modiﬁed by geomorphology and by major nodes of public or private investment. Radial transportation corridors. Radial transportation corridors are major catalysts of commercial and residential expansion, either directly as

235

236

Basic principles for molding land mosaics

Figure 9.2 Compact urban development with adjacent viable semi-natural land and agricultural land. Richmond, Virginia, USA. Photo courtesy of USDA-Soil Conservation Service.

(I)

(J)

strip development, or indirectly as nodal growth along a transportation corridor begins, elongates, and coalesces. Strategic position. The strategic position of a community conveys a commercial or other advantage over other places, though in time any advantage reﬂects the balance of changes in the community relative to those elsewhere. Hazardous areas. Establishing protected natural lands on high-hazard-risk areas helps avoid the social and economic disruptions of community ‘‘disasters.”

Communities and development (K)

(L)

(M)

(N)

Compact development. Compact development enriches the sphere of an individual’s social, cultural, employment, and other opportunities in a small area, reducing vehicular travel, and providing economic support for public transport and walking/biking paths. Development density. Residential development at sufﬁcient density helps support public transport conveniently accessible for both residential and employment locations. Geometry of a node (r2 problem). Since area is scarce around the center of a circle and increases rapidly moving outward, a land price gradient tends to produce concentric land-use zones, which may be broken by convenient transportation radii and planned slices or nodes of different land use. Infill. Inﬁll development on greenspaces in a built area is often beneﬁcial for creating compact neighborhoods, but only up to the point where quality parks are too far apart for most residents to walk, and stepping stones too far apart for effective species movement across the built area. Environment and community

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

Metabolism/ecosystem/machine analogy. Using the structure and ﬂows of an organism, ecosystem, or machine to understand a city emphasizes the importance of limited diverse inputs and outputs, and maintaining a diverse, but not too complex, structure within the city, both of which provide stability and adaptability for the inevitable big surprises ahead. Human--environment relationships. In addition to social needs and economic opportunity, human--environment relationships are at the core of a community and are sustained by an effective mix of greenspaces, built areas, infrastructure, and institutions. Environmental management. Management of urban environmental resources and problems that places short-term crisis-prevention measures as part of long-term solutions for a larger potential future community is likely to save costs, maintain public support, and establish a more sustainable future. Impermeable surfaces. Limiting the amount of impermeable-surface area, especially in suburbs, reduces rapid-runoff peak-ﬂow ﬂooding, recharges groundwater, reduces pollutant levels reaching water bodies, and improves local streams and ﬁsh populations. Drainage connection. Drainage connection area (impermeable surface directly connected by pipes or ditches to water bodies) is reduced by channeling stormwater into vegetated depressions and drainage basins,

237

238

Basic principles for molding land mosaics

(F)

which help reduce ﬂooding, ﬁlter water pollutants through the soil, and improve water quality and ﬁsh populations in water bodies. Wetland uses. Multi-use wetlands with adequate water ﬂow and attractive paths or boardwalks help provide recreation, biodiversity, aesthetics, ﬂood control, and pollutant absorption, and can separate or center neighborhoods. Social dimensions and sense of community

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

(F)

(G)

(H)

A central park. Parks in the center of communities normally are intensively used, serve as meeting places, receive considerable maintenance, and have severely degraded nature. A linear edge park. An edge park along the border of a community provides amenities for the existing community and for present or future outside communities, and, with limited human use, provides natural habitat and connectivity for movement of some species. Market-gardens. Market-gardening (truck farming) near a city provides fresh fruits and vegetables at low transport cost to city markets and restaurants, plus diverse environmental beneﬁts on the city’s outskirts. Human habitat. For planning purposes, a good human habitat is a community offering a choice in the diversity of frequently needed and used places (e.g., grocery, school, park, eatery) located in relative proximity to its residents. Neighborhood units. Neighborhoods serve as the basic social and planning units of a larger community or district, and several neighborhoods connected to a cultural and/or shopping center are likely to sustain the larger community. Urban district. An aggregation of interacting neighborhoods with a distinctive identity forms a district (or urban ‘‘village”), a place that residents identify with and that the broader city or metropolitan area uses for identiﬁcation and planning. Green, profitable, and fair. Combining environmental protection, economic growth/efﬁciency, and social justice/economic opportunity/income equality as equal parts under the rubric of sustainable development still seems to be utopian, marketing, impossible, or a ruse, yet balancing such big human and environmental objectives is attainable and should be the norm. Aesthetics and basics. Adding aesthetic forms, after providing the basics of water, neighborhoods, jobs, natural areas, etc. for a community, enhances a sense of place and stimulates people to actively care for it.

Land mosaics and landscape change (I) (J)

(K)

Sense of place. The intertwining of built structures and greenspaces that persist over time creates a place that people care for and remember. Community gardens (allotments). Joining neighbors digging in the soil and growing their own plants and foods on tiny adjoining plots enhances an understanding of nature and creates valuable social bonds that strengthen a community. Commuter-station areas for urban residents. Community gardens, bicycle parks, walking paths, and recreation areas centered around commuterrail stations provide important accessible resources and values for urban residents concentrated in high-density metro areas.

Land mosaics and landscape change This ﬁfth and last category of principles highlights the big picture. Land mosaics emphasize the structure or spatial pattern of a landscape or urban region, including how nature and people are arranged. Land change then focuses on how the pattern is altered or changes, plus the associated functional changes over time. Change may be catalyzed by overall planning or decision, or produced by the multitude of little steps taken by people (Odum 1982), or caused by natural systems. For these subjects, Pickett and White (1985), Zonneveld and Forman (1990), Forman (1995, 2004a), Dramstad et al. (1996), Ludwig et al. (1997), Losada et al. (1998), Dale and Haeuber (2001), Ingegnoli (2002), Gutzwiller (2002), Foster and Aber (2004), Chen et al. (2004), Lindenmayer and Fischer (2006), Erickson (2006), and Moore (2007) are particularly useful. Also see Chapter 3. The two subgroupings are: (a) land mosaics; and (b) landscape change. Land mosaics

(A)

(B)

(C)

Structure--function--change feedbacks. Landscape structure or pattern controls landscape function (how the area works), which alters structure, in turn causing function to change. Spatial scales. Ecological and human conditions in an area (such as a landscape) are strongly affected by patterns and processes at three scales: the broader scale (e.g., region); the ﬁner scale (e.g., large patches within the landscape); and surrounding areas (e.g., competing or collaborating) at the same scale. Hierarchical structure. A spatial hierarchy of habitat sizes, stream orders, and population sizes controls the amounts and directions of ﬂows and movements across a landscape, and patterns and processes of a particular type tend to differ at different spatial scales.

239

240

Basic principles for molding land mosaics (D)

(E)

(F)

(G)

(H)

Grain size of the mosaic. A coarse-grained landscape (mainly composed of large patches) that contains ﬁne-grained areas (mainly small patches) is better than either type alone, because it effectively provides for many large-patch beneﬁts, multi-habitat species including humans, and a wide range of habitats and natural resources (Figure 9.2). Mosaic pattern and multi-habitat species. Species (and people) that regularly use different habitats or land uses are favored by convergency points (junctions where three or more habitats converge), adjacencies (different combinations of adjoining habitat types), and habitat interspersion (habitat types scattered rather than aggregated). Environmental gradients and patchiness. Environmental gradients with gradual ecological change over space are sometimes evident, though patchiness with distinct boundaries predominates on land, because of patchy substrates and especially human activities that typically sharpen boundaries. Nature and a grid. A regular grid, such as of roads and strip development, may be the ecologically worst way to distribute a small amount of built area over a natural landscape, since the grid leaves only small natural patches, truncates connectivity, and removes much of the irregularity and heterogeneity characteristic of nature’s species-rich communities. Key variables of urban areas. Human population density and spatial proximity are considered to be the two leading variables, with functionality the third, providing understanding and predictive ability for most human patterns and issues in urban areas. Landscape change

(A)

(B)

(C)

Ecologically optimum change. The optimum way to change a large natural landscape to a less ecologically suitable one is to progressively remove vegetation in strips from two adjacent sides of the landscape, maintain a few large green patches in the middle phase, and then sequentially remove the patches. Specific changes within an optimum sequence. Determining an optimum spatial sequence for a changing landscape permits one to pinpoint at any stage the best and worst locations for a speciﬁc change, either deleterious or beneﬁcial. Spatial processes. With the spread of human activities, natural areas may be perforated, dissected, fragmented, shrunk, and/or eliminated with quite different ecological consequences, even though habitat loss and isolation normally increase with all of the processes.

Land mosaics and landscape change (D)

(E)

(F)

(G)

(H)

(I)

(J)

(K)

Change in mosaic pattern. Ongoing human activities and natural disturbances keep the structure and habitat diversity of a land mosaic changing over time, as land uses and successional-stage habitats ‘‘move around,” even though natural resources of the whole landscape may be in a degradation, meta-stable, or restoration trajectory. Greenspace in a changing context. All greenspaces change over time from interactions with adjacent and more-distant land uses, with the intensity or rate of ﬂows/movements decreasing with distance and increasing with direction of incoming wind/water ﬂows, animal locomotion, and human inﬂuences. Worst urbanization. Regional urbanization in dispersed sites surrounding a metropolitan area, and to a lesser extent along transportation corridors, appears to cause the most extensive nature-and-human resource degradation (Chapter 8). Best urbanization. Urbanization focused around satellite cities, which causes the least overall resource degradation, appears to be the best regional development pattern, though factors speciﬁc to a region may indicate a preference for combining satellite-city development with concentric-zone development adjacent to a metropolitan area (Chapter 8). Cumulative effects. Cumulative effects represent the combination of spatially separate effects, previous effects at different times, and different types of effects, and therefore a group of different and dispersed solutions is normally required to signiﬁcantly reduce or mitigate cumulative effects. Time lags. Time lags reﬂecting the inertia or resilience of nature mean that some ecological responses (such as biological diversity and populations of long-lived species) are delayed after a change, that some ecological conditions today reﬂect earlier patterns, that mitigation may be effective well after landscape degradation, and that a successful response may be delayed after mitigation. Plan/design for long term. A land-use plan which provides an adaptable pattern to anticipate and respond to changes and which outlines broad land-use areas or zones, with only spots designed in detail, is more likely to be a successful long-term plan. Region and local. Planning regionally for broad-scale patterns (e.g., large greenspaces, highways) and then planning locally (e.g., neighborhoods, aesthetics) to effectively mesh with them is likely to successfully address both regional and local needs.

241

242

Basic principles for molding land mosaics (L)

Communities and history. Cities and towns are a product of historical development, yet they have also helped shape that history.

In conclusion, a treasure chest of principles has been opened. Many are or will become second nature to practitioners and scholars dealing with land use and urban regions. The list is also a handbook to be kept handy for solving problems. In effect, the principles are convenient handles for molding better urban regions where nature and people both thrive long term. Such a cornucopia of riches calls out for a few governing principles or broad paradigms, from which the detailed statements or principles follow. Perhaps the patch--corridor--matrix model or pattern-process paradigm illustrates one of the broad paradigms (Forman 1995, Turner et al. 2001, Robert McDonald, personal communication). Many of the principles, at least indirectly, follow from that. Articulating the few broad paradigms covering all principles awaits an exceptionally creative mind. At the other end of the conceptual scale, some of the principles articulated follow from more detailed or basic theories, such as central place and hierarchy theory (O’Neill et al. 1986, Hall 2002). Finally, experts in speciﬁc ﬁelds can and hopefully will delineate more, better, and fuller lists of principles in those ﬁelds. The value of the preceding treasure chest is to see the principles from different ﬁelds listed together, and to see some integrated principles that cross ﬁelds. Consider this list to be a palette, much in need for direct use today. But also consider it a work in progress, readily amenable to enhancement and enrichment on into the future.

10

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic

Suppose you were faced with developing a regional plan that highlights natural systems and their human uses for one of the world’s great cities. You have never been to the city or its surroundings, though you once lived in the broader geographic region. What would you do? Here is my story, and especially its result. Barcelona struck me as a vibrant livable place with a cutting-edge can-do attitude. Best known are the amazing multicolored organic structures created more than 80 years ago across the city by Antoni Gaudi. I was inspired by his Parque Guell, especially the stunning evocative mosaics created with broken pieces of brightly colored ceramics (Color Figure 40). They are as magical today as when he did them. Any land mosaic I propose for the Greater Barcelona Region should be as inspiring, valuable, and long-lasting as those ceramic mosaic masterpieces in tiny spaces. In essence, a 150-page conceptual plan (including 28 maps) was prepared over a 15-month period for the city’s Mayor and Chief Architect (Forman 2004a). The project objective was to evaluate and highlight the importance of the urban region (rather than the city), the major natural systems therein, and the diverse human uses of these natural systems. This challenge was addressed by the development of a ‘‘land mosaic for natural systems and people” based on landscape ecology and other principles. I extensively visited the region, talked with diverse knowledgeable experts, and accumulated shelves of valuable information, maps, and literature. The resulting report listed important assumptions, stated basic principles, outlined a vision, portrayed simple spatial models, applied the models to the region, and identiﬁed options. Major themes were highlighted in detail. And three plan options for the Greater Barcelona Region as a whole were described, mapped, and compared.

243

244

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic Perspective and approach Now let us examine more closely the project and see the major results and recommendations in context. The background perspective for the project was very similar to that presented in the opening section of this book. Land is home and heritage, also capital and investment. Both types are scarce in an urban region, yet land is still being ‘‘wasted” there. A dense population depends daily and fundamentally on natural systems that are out of sight, out of the city. But like a hungry giant, uncontrolled urban expansion devours the closest and best resources. These regions are dynamic mosaics with human pieces expanding and natural pieces shrinking, leaving the fundamental human dependence on nature’s resources riskier, less sustainable. Flows and changing patterns across the land are central foundations for planning an urban region. Surface water ﬂowing in streams and rivers supports many human needs, from clean drinking water to recreation, wastewater treatment, and aesthetics. Groundwater ﬂows create ‘‘underground reservoirs” that support wells, agriculture, and diverse natural plant communities. Wildlife moves across the land, a key value for recreation, even human culture. At the same time, unpolluted water becomes scarce and expensive. Trafﬁc jams proliferate. Highways subdivide nature into pieces. Appealing recreational and tourist sites degrade. Impermeable surfaces spread and ﬂood peaks get higher. Productive agriculture and family farms shrink. All so familiar. People of the region, long dependent on local resources and beneﬁts of natural systems, must increasingly depend on more distant, more expensive resources. In Barcelona we stand on a threshold at the onset of the century. Most of the important agricultural areas in the region could shrivel up, or alternatively continue as a key resource in the land. Cities, towns and villages could merge, for example in the Central Valles area, into a single huge amorphous urbanized zone, or alternatively, the municipalities could maintain, even enhance, their identities and distinctiveness. The Llobregat River delta right next to the city could be all urbanized, or could be a distinctive, striking area celebrating its unique resource, abundant clean water. Towns and small cities could drown in trafﬁc, or could have convenient walkable small-to-medium industries and neighborhood parks around their edges. And on and on. A rich set of natural resources for the people could still be in Barcelona’s future, but at the present rate and trajectory, that set will be noticeably diminished in a decade or two. Investing in natural systems also pays economic dividends. Thus revamping ﬂoodplain design, targeting a handful of pollution sources, maintaining large agricultural landscapes, and concentrating rather than dispersing development can signiﬁcantly reduce costs, e.g., of ﬂood damage, increasingly scarce water supply, infrastructure and servicing, and market-gardening products. More

Perspective and approach broadly, planning that heads off crises and creates positive trajectories and legacies for the region is good economics. A land-use framework that spatially arranges nature and people so they both thrive long term is the focus (Forman 2002a). In contrast to legal and regulatory approaches that can and do change ‘‘overnight,” this spatial approach tends to provide a longer-term future for the region. Indeed, when the public sees, uses, and understands the value of certain land and its arrangement, degrading or transforming it is less likely. Also, rather than doing separate plans for each sector (e.g., transportation, housing, water) and then trying to mesh them, land areas and natural systems, often with several uses for society, are the fundamental pieces to ﬁt together to form the completed puzzle. Finally, ﬂexibility and adaptability to provide stability in the face of big changes and surprises ahead remain an underlying planning thread. Urban planning traditionally enhances the quality of people’s life and promotes intelligent growth, whereas conservation planning protects the natural systems and nature that people depend on, use, and value (Noss and Cooperider 1994, Dailey and Ellison 2002, Opdam et al. 2002). No model or case study was found that sustains the diverse natural resources and nature in the region around a major city. A new strategic approach is needed to mesh both halves, people and nature, and create a whole. The Barcelona project thus targets and highlights the gaping hole or weakest link in current urban-region thinking, i.e., nature and diverse natural systems for people. In essence, the objective of the planning project is to outline promising spatial arrangements and solutions that enhance natural systems and associated human land uses for the long-term future of the Greater Barcelona Region. Land mosaic with distinctive features, the Greater Barcelona Region

Land-mosaic theory and principles focus on the spatial arrangement of land uses in large heterogeneous areas such as landscapes, regions, or the area seen from an airplane window or in an aerial photograph, exactly the right spatial scale for effective planning (Chapter 1). The landscape or region exhibits three broad characteristics: structure (the spatial pattern or arrangement of land uses present), function (the movement or ﬂows of water, materials, species, and people through the pattern), and change (the dynamics or transformation of pattern over time) (Forman 1995, Farina 2005, Gutzwiller 2002). The land mosaic or structural pattern is conveniently reduced to only three types of elements: patches, corridors, and a background matrix. Patches are large or small, dispersed or clustered, and so on. Corridors are narrow or wide, continuous or disconnected, etc. The matrix is single or subdivided, perforated or dissected, and so forth. Adding a housing development, a nature reserve, or a highway, for example, changes the mosaic pattern, with movements and ﬂows

245

246

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic thereby altered in generally predictable ways. The patch--corridor--matrix model thus provides a useful ﬂexible handle for land-use planning. A land-use map portrays the big patches, corridors, and matrix of the Greater Barcelona Region (Acebillo and Folch 2000). The ﬂows and movements of water, materials, species, and people across this mosaic match the activity of a bee’s nest. Looking ahead, existing trends strongly suggest the following changes for the Greater Barcelona Region 50 years from now, and in most cases 10 years hence: (1) more people, buildings, sprawl, wasted precious land, roads, trafﬁc, and coalescence of municipalities; (2) less clean water, parkland, agricultural land and production, and area for natural systems and nature; (3) also, hotter drier climate, spread of second homes, more buildings on steep slopes and on skylines, near-disappearance of clean stretches of streams and rivers, and reduced biodiversity (Barraco et al. 1999, Folch 2000, Acebillo and Folch 2000, Prat et al. 2002, Busquets 2005, Rowe 2006). Pulses rather than linear trajectories are likely to occur: immigration and population growth spurts, climate warming effects, mega-ﬂoods, serious economic drops, and less predictable surprises. The current land mosaic of the GBRegion contains several distinctive and important attributes on which to base a plan. These include (Roda et al. 1999, Acebillo and Folch 2000, Prat et al. 2002): (1) an impressive set of large protected natural areas on mountains; (2) high visual quality on hillslopes and skylines with little urbanization; (3) the Llobregat and Tordera river ﬂoodplains/deltas as major sources of abundant clean water in a relatively dry climate; (4) wetlands, coastal vegetation, and marine littoral ecosystems as traces of a rich heritage reduced to a few threatened locations; (5) outward spreading towns ready to coalesce in some areas; (6) separate houses on large lots, a sprawl pattern ready to explode across the region; and (7) local rail lines and train stations apparently less abundant than in comparable areas of Europe, suggesting vehicular trafﬁc growth as a major threat. Approach and methods

The overall planning approach is conceptual rather than quantitative. The land-use focus is on nature itself and on nature--human interactions, but not on society itself. Planning solutions are integrated, and high-to-low priorities are generally evident rather than presented in a ranked list. The target is a broadscale regional plan with maps, not detailed ﬁne-scale maps, site analyses, and speciﬁcations. To attract and engage decision-makers and potentially gain public support, the approach strives to be both visionary and feasible. For this relatively large Greater Barcelona Region and with limited time, I chose not to: (1) drown in details of extensive databases; (2) try evaluating the contents of numerous existing and proposed plans; and (3) make widespread

Perspective and approach observations on ﬁner-scale secondary issues. This is not a traditional urban or regional plan in the sense of providing mainly for people and growth, since natural systems stand alongside people as major goals to mesh in the mosaic of land (Mata and Tarroja 2006). Nor is it a multi-stakeholder or committeereport plan that ends up, eventually, proposing an incremental or least-commondenominator change. Nor is this an action plan with a stepwise sequence of speciﬁc implementation recommendations, which would be closely dependent on traditions, laws, and regulations, as well as political and economic conditions. At each step the planning process is designed to be simple, lucid, and close to the land and people. For a plan, or parts of it, to get off the shelf and be implemented, it must be understandable by decision-makers as well as the public, who both must explain it, defend it, and generate excitement in it. An existing area and semi-governmental organization, Barcelona Regional, has been effectively used in recent years for planning that involves the city and many surrounding municipalities (Acebillo and Folch 2000). Still, important urbanization and other processes occur outside this planning area. Thus the Greater Barcelona Region, with twice the area (i.e., 6500 km2 ) and a radius of about 65 km (40 mi), was selected for this planning project (Forman 2004a). The area includes El Vendrell, Igualada, Calaf, Manresa, Vic Valley, and Tordera ﬂoodplain. Later I identiﬁed 16 sections of the Greater Barcelona Region for more detailed maps and descriptions. Also solutions are frequently woven into the report for small places, such as gullies, streams, highways, and the edges of towns, which are widely repeated and have a large cumulative effect across the region. This is a long-term plan for the Greater Barcelona Region as a whole. Linkages with other regions are important. Also, plans limited to individual portions of the region would be different, but valuable, as long as they are readily compatible with solutions for the Greater Barcelona Region as a whole. Six intensive visits of 3--6 days each at all seasons over a 16-month period permitted me to visit all portions of the Greater Barcelona Region (though time prevented a much-needed analysis of interactions with other regions) (Forman 2004a). I traveled with regional experts and consulted with many other helpful knowledgeable leaders. Numerous reports and published materials were provided and many other publications accumulated. In addition, Barcelona Regional produced, always in a time-efﬁcient manner, a rich set of background information, images, and maps for this project. Assumptions, principles, vision, spatial models, three plan options

Thirty-ﬁve important assumptions were stated, usually each in a single sentence (Forman 2004a). The plan rests on these. Also, 44 principles from

247

248

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic landscape ecology and other ﬁelds were succinctly stated (also see Chapter 9). These range from habitat conservation and stream corridors to transportation, development, and landscape change. The basic principles point to a vision, effectively a set of ﬂexible land patterns to sustain natural systems and people at a high level in the GBRegion (Forman 2002a). Scattered glimpses of the vision resemble a ‘‘wish list” of desirable characteristics. The vision is not to perpetuate existing conditions, which will surely change markedly under any scenario. Rather, it is something to rest our ladder on, and climb toward. The principles are meshed with the distinctive existing patterns and processes of the Greater Barcelona Region. The ﬁrst step selects the ‘‘primary” principles, those offering the greatest overall beneﬁts. The second step portrays the primary principles as simple spatial models or diagrams, which are applied or compared with speciﬁc patterns in the region to identify promising options. Usually two to four options for each principle are evaluated by simply listing the beneﬁts and disadvantages. The third step, basically a best-judgment iterative process, then combines the preferred options (most beneﬁts, least disadvantages). These general steps lead to three comprehensive spatial solutions for the GBRegion, each of which should achieve the original stated objective (Forman 2004a). Also each solution is considered to lie in the envelope of feasibility. For convenience, the three options are labeled the ‘‘Most-promising Plan,” the ‘‘Solid Plan,” and the ‘‘Minimal Plan.” Rather than being three alternatives with quite-different central themes, the three plans have common central themes and differ in how much or how strong proposed changes will be. Thus the three are presented ﬂexibly, so decision-makers and the public can add or subtract pieces from any of the plans. Finally, all three plans provide a mosaic of land uses for the whole urban region, as well as for each portion and piece within it. In this way one can easily see how changes or non-changes for the individual pieces ﬁt into the big picture. Thus a trajectory of implementation could be established for the whole region. Or portions or pieces of the region could be addressed in the context of the big picture and its trajectory.

Nature, food, and water Now we turn to the seven primary themes that emerged from this process and are incorporated in the plans and solutions for the Greater Barcelona Region. These represent the conceptual heart of the project. The ﬁrst four: (1) emerald network, (2) major food areas for the future, (3) water for nature

Nature, food, and water and us, and (4) streams, rivers, and blue-green ribbons, are presented in this section. The other three: (5) growth, development, and municipalities, (6) transportation and industry, and (7) nature and people in municipalities, emerge in the following section. Emerald network

Large natural-vegetation areas or patches interconnected by vegetation corridors form the emerald network (Forman 2004a). This is the fundamental backbone of natural systems protection in a landscape or region, the piece de resistance of the Greater Barcelona Region (Color Figure 41). The network provides numerous values, from a permanent buffer against species extinction to a limit against endless urbanization, and is composed of emeralds and connections. Two solutions were outlined: (1) emeralds, the crown jewels of nature; and (2) connected land: ﬁve types of connections. Emeralds, the crown jewels of nature Large natural-vegetation areas or emeralds provide a group of beneﬁts that cannot be provided in any other way, including: water quality protection for aquifers; connectivity of headwater streams; habitat to sustain populations of patch-interior species; a source of species dispersing through the matrix and to small patches; and ability to absorb or persist through natural disturbances over time (Forman 1995). Additional important beneﬁts for society include ﬂood control, adequate water for sewage treatment facilities, aesthetics, biodiversity, wood products, and recreational opportunities from family picnicking to bird watching, hunting, hiking, and youth education (Parc de Collserola 1997, Liddle 1997, Bacaria et al. 1999, Roda et al. 1999, Blondel and Aronson 1999, Atauri and de Lucio 2001, Grove and Rackham 2001). Eight large protected natural areas currently exist in the Greater Barcelona Region (Garraf, Collserola, Montnegre-El Corredor, Montseny, Sant Llorenc del Munt, Montserrat, Serra de Castelltallat, and Serralada Transversal) (Roda et al. 1999, Acebillo and Folch 2000), and two additional ones are proposed. The Ancosa-Miralles emerald (west of the Penedes) combines and gives integrity to a cluster of ﬁve separate medium and small existing protected areas, and ﬁlls a void in the western quarter of the Region. The Serra de Rubio emerald (north of Igualada) connects headwater stream areas of the Anoia and Llobregat rivers, protects some European-Community-listed rare habitats, and helps link the isolated Castelltallat to Montserrat and Ancosa-Miralles. The combination of distinctive predominant vegetation and predominant rock surfaces emphasizes that all ten emeralds are ecologically important. Three emeralds, Garraf, Collserola,

249

250

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic and Montnegre-El Corredor, are increasingly threatened by urbanization, and in Serralada Transversal watershed protection is needed for the critical reservoirs. Fire management has special importance in the GBRegion because built areas alternate with large natural areas (Vallejo and Alloza 1998, Moreira et al. 2001, Forman 2004a). Fire management tends to focus on the large natural areas, where three overriding objectives often have to be spatially meshed. Protecting (1) forests growing wood products, (2) rare ﬁre-adapted species, and (3) built areas (near natural areas) requires quite different strategies. Thus a carefully designed arrangement of ﬁre-management techniques is required. Connected land: five types of connections The overall objective is to provide landscape connectivity to facilitate the movement of species as well as people (Saunders and Hobbs 1991, Forman 1995, Bennett 2003, Ahern 2002, Jongman and Pungetti 2004). Wide connecting areas are the most certain long-term way of accomplishing this in the face of human activities changing and spreading in unforeseen ways. Probably few species require corridors, but movement of numerous species is enhanced with them. Also the fauna is better off on connected than isolated patches. Where vegetation corridors cross major transportation routes it is important to construct passages, either underpasses or overpasses, for effective wildlife and people crossing (Rosell Pages and Velasco Rivas 1999, Forman et al. 2003, Iuell et al. 2003, Trocme et al. 2003). Walking paths in the corridors provide connectivity for hiking and recreation in the GBRegion. Serious hikers could walk across or even around the entire region. More importantly though, everyone will live not too far from a path for a relaxed brief stroll in nature. Five types of connections, all providing for species movement and a walking path between emeralds, offer ﬂexibility (Color Figure 41) (Forman 2004a). Natural vegetation forms the predominant land use, though in some connections farmland or ‘‘people parks” are also quite appropriate: (1) (2) (3)

(4)

Reconnection zone: a wide vegetation connection of nearby protected areas that normally creates a single stronger integrated protected area. Green ribbon: a wide vegetation corridor that crosses overland and normally connects protected areas. Blue-green ribbon: a wide vegetation corridor, usually covering ﬂoodplain and adjacent slopes, that protects a stream and may connect to a protected area. Ribbon of pearls: a wide vegetation corridor with attached small naturalvegetation patches (pearls) as ‘‘rest stops” to enhance wildlife movement along its length.

Nature, food, and water (5)

String of pearls: a narrow linear vegetation-lined walkway with attached small natural-vegetation patches as ‘‘rest stops” to enhance wildlife movement. Major food areas for the future

The values of agriculture in a urban region are striking. In the Greater Barcelona Region it provides food products for today’s residents, as well as longterm ﬂexibility and stability for the region through periods of major change. Urban agriculture beneﬁts include the historical symbolism or heritage of farmland, the active roles of farm families, the educational dimensions of farms, aesthetics and rural character of landscapes, enhanced game populations, important wildlife species and biodiversity, and the ethics of protecting prime foodproducing areas in a world with growing hunger. Protecting the best soils is a priority -- a nation stands on its soils. Three solutions were outlined: (1) the large productive agricultural landscapes; (2) agriculture-nature parks; and (3) concentrated greenhouses. The large productive agricultural landscapes Large agricultural landscapes are much better than the same area in small pieces. Farm operations are more efﬁcient, negative impacts from other land uses and people are less, large open areas support key open-land wildlife species, and long-term protection is easier and less expensive. The large agricultural landscapes of the GBRegion -- vineyard area (Penedes), grain area (Calaf Valley, including today’s ﬁelds-and-woodland around it), livestock and grain area (Vic Valley including western portion to Prats de Llucanes), small-market and family-food-garden areas (Tordera ﬂoodplain and Llobregat ﬂoodplain and delta), and concentrated greenhouse areas (certain Maresma valley bottoms) -- provide highly diverse products and income (Color Figure 42) (Acebillo and Folch 2000, Forman 2004a). As markets and other factors change over time, the prime soils and local farming cultures of large agricultural landscapes maintain the ﬂexibility and stability critical to the region. Each major agricultural landscape has signiﬁcant problems, but the basic viability of the Vic agricultural land and the Lower Llobregat ﬂoodplain and delta are now threatened. Spread of Vic and nearby towns, plus fragmentation of the land into pieces, threatens the Vic Valley. Urbanization on the Lower Llobregat ﬂoodplain would eliminate signiﬁcant productive land, and probably accelerate contraction and loss of the key water-related resources of the delta. Currently the Penedes land is of exceptional economic importance, and the Llobregat ﬂoodplain/delta is of combined major ecological and economic signiﬁcance. In such circumstances, every hectare counts.

251

252

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic Numerous small farming areas and isolated ﬁelds across the region provide stability for its future, but, since they exist at a ﬁner scale, are not included in this regional perspective and plan. Finally, within an agricultural landscape, stream corridors, woods, hedgerows, and scattered shrubs and trees are of particular importance for nature and wildlife. Agriculture--nature parks The present set of protected natural areas is overwhelmingly on mountains or hills and designed for forest-dependent values. Therefore the rich nature and biodiversity dependent on farmland, especially smaller ﬁelds and less intensive agricultural practices (e.g., in the rapidly urbanizing Valles) have almost no protection in the GBRegion. For example, a signiﬁcant number of the EuropeanCommunity-listed rare migratory birds in the region are concentrated in successional habitats of valley farmland (Pino et al. 2000). Agriculture--nature parks that combine active farming and nature protection appear to be the optimum long-term solution (Color Figure 42) (Forman 2004a). Some portion of the farm ﬁelds would be maintained in designated successional habitat types. Agriculture--nature parks are most appropriately located in valleys adjacent to large protected natural areas or emeralds, where farm families and the management expertise of conservation-park personnel could be combined to enhance farm production and nature conservation on the parks. Seven proposed agriculture--nature parks are dispersed across the region: (1) southern boundary of Castelltallat; (2) valley east of Sant Quirze projecting into Serralada Transversal; (3) valley east of Manlleu projecting into Serralada Transversal; (4) by Tordera River north of Montnegre-El Corredor; (5) Eastern Valles on south side of Montseny; (6) southwest of Igualada on northeast side of an expanded AncosaMiralles protected area; and (7) southeast side of Penedes along an expanded northwest side of the Garraf. Over time the agriculture--nature parks will become major, but different, food-producing areas, further enhancing the economics and stability of the Greater Barcelona Region. In the important Lower Llobregat ﬂoodplain and delta a remarkable ‘‘agricultural park” exists next to some protected wetlands, coastal vegetation, and undeveloped (without nearby buildings) coastline (Boada and Capdevila 2000, Acebillo and Folch 2000). Market-gardening (truck farming) and family-food gardens predominate as the region’s primary orchard area for cherries, apples, etc., and a major producer of artichokes and vegetables. A rather similar area exists in the Lower Tordera River ﬂoodplain. Assuming a signiﬁcant expansion of protected wetland, coastal vegetation, and undeveloped coastline in each ﬂoodplain/delta area, both areas seem appropriate as agriculture parks.

Nature, food, and water Concentrated greenhouses The major clusters of greenhouses in certain valleys of the Maresma together represent an important area of food and ﬂower production. Two relatively simple changes would greatly increase the value of these for nature and people. Scattered shrubs, trees, and tiny woods, plus vegetation along gullies would provide habitats and feeding areas for birds and other wildlife. The gain to society would be still greater with the addition of small recreational facilities. Two problem areas apparently need evaluation and solution: greenhouses scattered on surrounding steep slopes, and excessive fertilizer used in the plantproduction process. Water for nature and us

Water scarcity and ﬂooding pose a dilemma. Could water shortage be the Achilles heel of Barcelona’s growth and inﬂuence? Is an August 2002 ﬂooding of nations and major cities of Northern and Central Europe a harbinger of the future for the GBRegion? Although no single major solution exists, a package of solutions looks promising (Forman 2004a). Each solution in the package addresses two or more speciﬁc water-related issues. Engineers and hydrologists combined with aquatic biologists and landscape ecologists are central to the solutions. Four solutions were outlined: (1) too little water: scarcity; (2) too much water: ﬂoods; (3) two ﬂows: stormwater and sewage; and (4) wetlands. Too little water: scarcity Most global-climate-change experts agree that in this region in the 2020s annual precipitation will be about 10--15 % lower, and 20 % lower by the 2050s (McCarthy et al. 2001). During this period, exactly the time period considered in the present plan, increases are likely in: frequency of intense precipitation events; ﬂood hazard; risk of water shortage; and summer drought risk. That suggests both less available water and more ﬂooding ahead. If it is likely than no new clean fresh water will be discovered and the sky will provide less, two strategies to get large amounts of water within the GBRegion seem possible (ignoring expensive desalinization and bringing water from other regions). Reduce demand, and clean up dirty water. Reducing demand through water-conservation measures is mainly a ﬁner-scale approach focusing on individuals, industries, municipalities, and government. Here the focus is on land use for the long term. There is lots of water around the GBRegion ﬂowing in streams and rivers. But almost all of it looks and is dirty. Hardly anyone sees ﬁshermen there, for good reason. Hardly anyone would drink out of these never-ending ﬂows of stream

253

254

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic and river water. So, cleaning up the dirty water makes a huge supply of clean water available right around us, even into the future (Prat et al. 2002, Forman 2004a). Solutions in the water-scarcity package include stream corridors and riparian vegetation that recharge groundwater, ﬁltering water though the ground to clean it, protecting aquifers, creating a stormwater drainage system so sewage treatment plants can work and clean better, stormwater-created wetlands to clean water, and more (Color Figure 43) (Rieradevall and Cambra 1994, Decamps and Decamps 2001, Prat et al. 2002). Also, where do the wastewater pipes from rural homes, villages, and towns go? With a better system for these numerous local sites, much more clean water would be available throughout the GBRegion. Providing more clean water for residents also beneﬁts natural systems. Riparian vegetation on ﬂoodplains, particularly shrub cover on upper portions of stream systems, will provide rich habitat for wildlife and greatly enhance biodiversity. Rejuvenated streams and rivers, native ﬁsh, ﬁsh-eating herons, other species, and yes, ﬁshermen, will be widespread. Aquifers with clean water can be well protected with extensive natural vegetation. Pollutants from urbanization and industry basically accumulate in the typically slow-moving aquifer water, thus degrading the water source. To reduce saltwater intrusion into the Llobregat delta (and elsewhere along the coast) (Acebillo and Folch 2000), the most important aquifer in the region, requires minimizing the input of pollutants, minimizing the pumping out of water in both the lower ﬂoodplain and the delta, and increasing the normal ﬂow of river water. Too much water: floods Global modelers highlight frequent intense-precipitation events and greater ﬂood hazard ahead in the GBRegion. But with roads, parking lots, and buildings, urbanization adds extensive impermeable surfaces. Perhaps worse, pipes and drainage channels often carry the rainwater right to gullies, streams, and rivers. The inevitable result is increased pulse ﬂooding, where water levels rise quickly, reach higher levels causing damage, and drop quickly leaving little water available in the channel (Decamps and Decamps 2001, Forman et al. 2003). On this trajectory the ‘‘hundred-year ﬂood” may come twice a decade. The ﬂood-reduction package of solutions contains (Color Figure 43) (Forman 2004a): (1) emerald-network protection against slope erosion and runoff; (2) stream corridors and riparian vegetation that recharge groundwater and aquifers; (3) a stormwater drainage system with pipes that create wetlands (or sponges); (4) disconnecting impermeable surfaces around built areas; and (5) small basin parks along ﬂoodplains to hold some ﬂoodwater from and for

Nature, food, and water the surrounding neighborhood. The solutions that also address water scarcity are especially cost effective. Although ﬂood reduction is a prime societal goal, once again natural systems and nature will be big winners with these solutions. Establishing and maintaining woody vegetation along stream and riverbanks provides a multitude of beneﬁts (Decamps and Decamps 2001). Recharging groundwater keeps streams ﬂowing and can support wetland vegetation, an extremely rich source of wildlife and biodiversity. Small neighborhood basin parks along lower portions of a stream system would provide seasonal wetlands for wildlife. Two flows: stormwater and sewage Numerous sewage-treatment facilities are spread across the region to serve cities and towns (Acebillo and Folch 2000). Currently stormwater runoff and human sewage enter and ﬂow in the same piping system to a secondary sewage-treatment facility. During rainstorms, especially heavy ones, the systems apparently are often overloaded so overﬂow raw sewage directly enters a stream or river. Villages with less than about 2000 people have some home septic systems, but mostly wastes seem to be piped to a nearby gully or stream (Narcis Prat, personal communication). From a public-health perspective, treatment of human sewage is the most effective way to stop the spread of E. coli and many other illnesses and diseases. Also, stormwater washes a range of toxic substances from urban and highway sources into sewage-treatment facilities. Separate drainage systems for stormwater and sewage would provide numerous ecological and human beneﬁts (Color Figure 43) (Forman 2004a). By removing stormwater ﬂows from the sewage-treatment facility, the treatment of human sewage would be more effective. During rainstorms, overloads and overﬂows of raw sewage would be much less frequent. Disease spread would be diminished and public-health authorities happier. Streams and rivers would look less like a sewer and would smell better. They would become places to walk along and enjoy, almost as if a new linear park suddenly appeared by every major town and city. Yet the ecological gains would be more extensive. With effective secondary treatment of human sewage, the aquatic ecosystems in almost every stream and river would improve. Native ﬁsh, herons, and ﬁshermen could thrive. The stormwater story is more interesting. Many stormwater drainage pipes, rather than leading to sewage-treatment facilities, or even directly to a stream, could simply lead to a depression (stormwater depression) in the ground, tiny or large, which may quickly become a wetland (Forman 2004a). Floodplains with a high watertable are good places for wetlands. The depression temporarily holds water from a storm; some evaporation occurs while water is slowly absorbed, sponge-like, into the ground. The water level in the depression tends to slowly

255

256

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic drop, and in a seasonal wetland may remain below ground level for a prolonged period most years. The ﬂuctuating water levels support wetland plants and wildlife (Boada and Capdevila 2000), including rare ones in the region. Typically some of the water absorbed in the wetland moves through the soil which ﬁlters out many toxic substances that currently ﬂow through sewage-treatment facilities into the stream. So, the ﬁsh and other aquatic organisms ‘‘like” this separate stormwater system and its many wetlands dispersed across the GBRegion. A long-lost heritage returns. Apparently a few neighborhoods currently have dual drainage systems. Several areas are identiﬁed as highest priorities to begin the process of separating stormwater and sewage ﬂows: (1) all new urbanization projects; (2) all towns in the Tordera River Valley; (3) municipalities along the Llobregat River from Sant Vincenq del Castellet to El Prat; and (4) municipalities upstream of the El Foix and Ter River reservoirs. This is an extremely effective way to accomplish multiple ecological and human goals, and see results quickly. Wetlands Long ago wetlands were doubtless scattered across the region, especially on ﬂoodplains and near the bases of mountains. Today a small handful remains mainly in the Lower Tordera ﬂoodplain and in the Llobregat delta (Color Figure 43) (Acebillo and Folch 2000). Wetlands include open ponds and marshes where groundwater is at or near the surface, but most restored wetlands would be shrubby or wooded swamps where the watertable is somewhat lower. Open areas have more water birds and wooded areas more songbirds, both apparently appreciated by the public. The most important factor in successful wetland restoration is to get the hydrology right (Mitsch and Gosselink 2000, France 2002, Forman et al. 2003). For an extended period during the year, the input of water to a depression (e.g., with clay in the bottom) needs to roughly equal water output due to percolation downward, runoff from the surface, and evaporation upward. On most ﬂoodplains, which normally have year-round groundwater, wetland species will quickly arrive and visible success will be obvious. The only places where large wetlands are feasible are the Lower Llobregat and Tordera ﬂoodplain/deltas. Small and tiny wetlands could be produced throughout the region, for instance, as depressions at the ends of stormwater drainage pipes and as basin parks by streams and rivers. Streams, rivers, and blue-green ribbons

Blue-green ribbons (stream corridors) are wide natural-vegetation strips that protect a stream or river, provide for wildlife movement, and include a

Nature, food, and water walkway (Color Figure 43) (Binford and Karty 2006, Decamps and Decamps 2001, Forman 2004a). They provide multiple goals for people and nature, including connectivity for movement by both aquatic organisms and terrestrial species along a valley. To be most effective the natural-vegetation ribbon covers the ﬂoodplain, both hill-slopes, and adjacent strips of well-drained upland. Some high-quality streams (e.g., Riera Sorreigs northwest of Vic) are presently protected for part of their length by a stream corridor. Four major issues are addressed: (1) water quality; (2) ﬂoodplain riparian vegetation; (3) industries, streams, and rivers; and (4) four rivers. Water quality Four types of water may be recognized: (1) looks and is dirty; (2) looks clean but isn’t (it’s not safe for swimming or eating ﬁsh); (3) swimmable and ﬁshable (it’s safe to swim and eat the ﬁsh, but don’t drink a drop); and (4) drinkable (potable). An aquatic biologist can easily describe these types rigorously from the aquatic life present (Rieradevall and Cambra 1994, Prat et al. 2002). Almost all the streams and rivers in the Greater Barcelona Region have the ﬁrst type of water; they mostly look and are dirty. They are unswimmable, unﬁshable, and undrinkable. At present, drinkable water basically comes from wells in uncontaminated groundwater or from surfacewater that goes through an expensive water-treatment facility. Mineral nutrients, with nitrogen and phosphorus of prime concern in the region, are introduced into streams and rivers in human sewage, livestock (particularly pig) waste, and greenhouse fertilizer use (Color Figure 43). Nitrate levels are so high in groundwater north of Vic that the public water supply is apparently unsafe to drink in 20 to 30 towns. (A few towns near the Tordera River seem to have the same problem). Both surface runoff and groundwater ﬂows carry nitrogen and phosphorus to the Ter River and its tributaries, which thereby become eutrophicated (ﬁlled with green ﬂoating algae because of the enrichment). The river then carries the nutrients, which eutrophicate the allimportant reservoirs. Sodium and chloride from salt mines and mine-waste piles in the Cardona and Navas valleys reduce water quality somewhat down the entire Llobregat to its mouth. Also, industrial pollutants are probably a widespread water problem in the region. Floodplain riparian vegetation Typically 80 to 95 % of the water entering a stream system enters in the small upper tributaries, whereas ﬂood hazard is primarily in the lower portion. Water that enters the upper channels is either absorbed into the ground to recharge the surrounding groundwater, or it rushes downstream. Riparian

257

258

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic vegetation along the gullies is a major determinant of how much enters the groundwater, and how much becomes downstream ﬂood hazard (Decamps and Decamps 2001). Trees with scattered shrubs and debris from previous ﬂoods, and even herbaceous vegetation, provide friction against ﬂowing water, which increases absorption into the ground. However, a good shrub cover (e.g., of Salix willow) along gullies and streams in the upper portion of a stream system is an especially effective way to reduce ﬂood hazard downstream. Poplar (Populus) for wood production, if combined with shrub cover, can provide effective friction. In the GBRegion two factors tend to remove valuable shrub cover, browsing by goats, sheep, etc. and family-food gardening, especially in the long stretches between towns and villages. Both lead to greater downstream ﬂooding. The lower portion of a stream system receives the water from upstream and is the key ﬂood hazard area (Decamps and Decamps 2001). Floodwaters may cover the ﬂoodplain valley and cause property damage including bridge washout. Rich wildlife habitat and biodiversity here are enhanced by: (1) shrub cover; (2) uprooted ﬂoating plants being widely deposited across the lower ﬂoodplain; and (3) diverse surface micro-topography that creates variations in groundwater and surfacewater conditions present. Important recreation beneﬁts can vary from walking paths near small streams to promenades and ‘‘people parks” by rivers. Industries, streams, and rivers Traditionally industries were established along rivers and major streams, around which villages and towns grew. Today electric power, fuel supplies, and water supplies reach across the land and support modern industry. The gradual removal of old industries from the streams and rivers of the Greater Barcelona Region would produce an enormous cumulative beneﬁt to natural systems and people (Color Figure 43). (Heavy industry [discussed later] and industrial sites of exceptional architectural/cultural heritage value of course are special cases.) Without the existing almost-non-stop stair-stepped sequence of small dams and elongated ponds, and without the associated need for industrial evaporativecooling, less direct evaporation from the stream surface would occur. A morenatural rapidly ﬂowing and winding river with stretches of splashing rifﬂes that oxygenate the water would appear. Aquatic habitat heterogeneity would increase, and more normal-period water ﬂows in the lower portions of rivers would be restored. Furthermore, without the input of industrial byproduct wastes, such as metals and toxic organic substances, stream and river water quality should greatly improve. In principle, light, medium, and heavy industries clean their water, e.g., in waste-treatment ponds, and pour reasonably clean water back into the stream

Nature, food, and water or into a sewage-treatment facility. Older industries, built before basic pollution standards, are doubtless less effective, on average, in maintaining clean streams and rivers. Finally, old industries by towns are often in prime riverside locations readily converted into wonderful parks and places for residents. Four rivers Among the streams and rivers of the GBRegion four are especially important, the Ter, Tordera, Besos, and Llobregat (Color Figure 43) (Acebillo and Folch 2000, Forman 2004a). Various tributaries of the four, as well as the Foix River, also have regionally important water ﬂows and other characteristics. Here the contrasting rivers are brieﬂy introduced: (A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

The Ter River system mainly north of Vic drains a large agricultural landscape with abundant livestock, particularly pigs. The Ter then ﬂows eastward into three reservoirs in the Serralada Transversal which are a major water supply for the Barcelona area. Phosphorus, and particularly nitrogen, from livestock wastes heavily pollute the river and cause eutrophication problems in the reservoirs. In contrast, the Tordera River system is by far the most natural one in the GBRegion. It originates in mountains and in the Girona area, ﬂows through some farmland, woodland, and town areas to a wide lower ﬂoodplain delta covered with market-gardening, plus scattered buildings and small wetlands. The Besos River system drains much of the Valles, formerly covered with small farms and now being rapidly urbanized and fragmented. The Lower Besos is channelized between transportation corridors and passes through Barcelona to its mouth. Although ﬂoods occur, the Lower Besos is commonly a small channel of water mainly emanating from sewagetreatment plants. A speciﬁc plan for the Valles and Besos is needed. Finally, the Llobregat, as the largest river system, drains a highly heterogeneous forested, agricultural, and built area representing nearly half of the GBRegion. The Lower Llobregat is a wide urbanization-lined ﬂoodplain, normally with rather little river water, that ends in an impressive delta. The delta is covered with market-gardening and family-food gardening, plus the Barcelona Airport, a town, and transportation corridors. The coastal strip includes limited amounts of coastal vegetation, undeveloped coastline, development, and highly signiﬁcant wetlands. Overall, the Llobregat River is degraded by reduced normal water ﬂow, pollutants from nearby industries and development, overloaded sewagetreatment plants, and structures encroaching on the ﬂoodplain.

259

260

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic Built areas and systems Three major groupings of issues are addressed: growth, development, and municipalities; transportation and industry; and nature and people in municipalities. Growth, development, and municipalities

This section pinpoints particularly suitable places for growth, inappropriate places for growth, and beneﬁcial forms of growth. Solutions emerge in ﬁve areas: (1) key areas for growth and development; (2) green-net areas; (3) municipalities for limited growth; (4) strengthening ﬂoodplains, slopes, major food areas, and emerald network; and (5) rest of the region. Key areas for growth and development One of the most important strategies for maintaining natural systems and their resources for people long term is to focus growth and development in areas where environmental damage will be low (Forman 2004a). Then speciﬁc locations can be selected based on transportation, access to resources, and other important socioeconomic factors (Folch 2000). Five satellite cities around the Greater Barcelona Region and two areas near Barcelona are thus highlighted as promising for growth and development (Color Figure 44): Igualada, Manresa, Mataro/Argentona, El Vendrell, Vic, ‘‘Llobregat West”, and the Lower Anoia area. Economic bases of the seven areas highlighted for growth might include the following: (A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

Igualada: industry; commercial services for the Calaf Valley and nearby Terragona area to the west; some nature tourism focused on three surrounding emeralds; (also see below for the nearby Lower Anoia area). Manresa: industry; a transportation hub; agricultural-products center for valleys around Calaf, Berga, and Solsona; some nature tourism focused on four surrounding emeralds. Mataro-Argentona: industry; residential commuters for the Barcelona metropolitan area; coastal tourism; some of the targeted nature tourism for the Tordera River watershed. El Vendrell: industry; transportation hub; commercial/service center for coastal tourist towns along the Southwest Coast; commercial support for the Penedes agricultural area. Vic: industry; commercial center for the Vic Valley and agricultural area to the west; transportation hub; and nature tourism focused on the Serralada Transversal. Because of the threat of loss and fragmentation of

Built areas and systems

(F) (G)

regionally signiﬁcant agricultural land, moderate and compact growth rather than major or dispersed growth is especially important. Llobregat West (general area around Gava-Sant Boi-Torrelles and perhaps northward): residential commuters for the Barcelona metropolitan area. Lower Anoia area (general area around Piera and surrounding towns): a promising area for a heavy-industry center and a trucking transportation center, strategically located near Barcelona and Igualada.

Large adjacent green areas and the sea help provide a human scale (and a linkage to the land) for the City of Barcelona as an extremely appealing urban area (Acebillo and Folch 2000). Urban models and experience emphasize that growing cities do not have to expand contiguously into adjacent areas. Indeed, most of the most appealing, livable, and successful cities maintain large openspace green areas adjacent to the city to provide rich beneﬁts to society. Although Collserola and the Lower Llobregat ﬂoodplain and delta are far too important for the future of the GBRegion to be used for development (Parc de Collserola 1997), the plan includes no major restriction on growth in the Valles or the southwestern part of the Maresma (Forman 2004a). Assuming growth of the Barcelona area will occur, densiﬁcation of certain existing built areas, along with limited residential expansion in the Llobregat West area, should be considered. If industrial and transportation growth is to occur nearby, the Lower Anoia area should be considered. Where hilly terrain is present, such as in Llobregat West, exceptional environmental sensitivity and planning are required. Some particularly beneﬁcial forms for growth are identiﬁed, including the early establishment of local integrated park systems, water-protection systems, and infrastructure/public-transport systems. Green-net areas Where several growing towns or cities are in proximity, they could simply coalesce into a large urbanized area like a large inefﬁcient non-city, or, if adequate incentive and investment exists, could be formed into a major new planned city near an existing major city. A third option, whereby each town or city could grow in a limited manner and retain its distinctive identity, is recommended here. To achieve this, a green net of vegetation, farmland, or parkland strips is established near municipality boundaries (Forman 2004a). Strips can change, for example, from natural vegetation to parkland according to local wishes, but must remain unbuilt green space. A minimum strip width seems appropriate though adjacent municipalities could choose to have wider strips. In this way each individual town can expand within its enclosed area, but not merge with an adjacent town or lose its identity and distinctiveness.

261

262

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic Seven areas seem particularly appropriate as green-net areas (Color Figure 44): (a) Western Valles (San Cugat-Terrassa-Sabadell area); (b) Central Valles (ParetsCaldes-La Garriga-Grenollers area); (c) Eastern Valles (Cardedeu-Canoves-Sant Antoni de Vilamajar area); (d) Lower Anoia (see above); (e) Llobregat West (GavaSant Boi to Sant Andreu); (f) Southwest Coast (Sitges to Segur de Calafell); and (g) Maresma Coast (Badalona to Malgrat de Mar). Compact rather than dispersed growth is the other key strategy in a greennet area. A green net mainly follows the outer boundaries of municipalities. Compact growth channels development in and adjacent to the existing, usually central urbanized area within a municipality. For example, a small municipality, Mollet del Valles, has concentrated urbanization in one portion of the municipality, thus protecting natural systems, productive agricultural land, and cultural resources, and helping create a strong sense of community. Municipalities for limited growth Because of the proximity of regionally signiﬁcant natural resources, urbanization near certain cities and towns would be damaging and inappropriate (Color Figure 44) (Forman 2004a). For example, to maintain the prime soils and integrity of the large agricultural landscapes of the region, very limited growth adjacent to the present built ‘‘footprint” of Calaf, Vilafranca del Penedes, Tordera, El Prat de Llobregat, and a few other towns is appropriate. Several towns around the edges of critical agricultural-production areas could grow, but not toward the production area. Limited growth, either in total or in a particular direction, is also appropriate for municipalities that threaten the natural resource values of emeralds and their interconnections, valuable stream corridors, European-Community-listed habitats, water-supply reservoirs, and so forth. In effect, limiting growth in key areas is just as important as focusing growth in other areas, to provide for the future of the GBRegion. Because of the exceptional resources and beneﬁts provided, the Lower Llobregat ﬂoodplain and delta represents the other area where very limited or no growth is paramount (Forman 2004a). The ﬂoodplain and delta provide the best aquifer for clean water in the region, a rich agricultural park beneﬁtting numerous residents and city markets, the most important wetlands in the region, ﬂood-buffering beneﬁts, riverine wildlife and ﬁsh, a large open space with vistas, clean air for city residents, and more. Today could be the last chance to ‘‘permanently” establish those resources and beneﬁts for future generations, which are likely to need them even more. Catalunyans revere unique ‘‘patrimony places.” The combined Lower Llobregat ﬂoodplain and delta is a ﬂagship one.

Built areas and systems Strengthening floodplains, slopes, major food areas, and the emerald network This section recognizes a set of diverse highly signiﬁcant places in the Greater Barcelona Region where most buildings are inappropriate (Forman 2004a). The absence of buildings on ﬂoodplains means less ﬂood damage. No buildings on steep slopes means fewer erosion and sedimentation problems, reduced costs of infrastructure construction and maintenance, less home damage from heavy rains or from ﬁres sweeping up-slope, and less aesthetic degradation of view-sheds. Quantities of high-quality grapes only grow on the Penedes agricultural soil, which is much too valuable for growing houses. Similarly, most buildings in emeralds or in their connecting ribbons degrade key values for natural systems and wildlife. To accomplish the important objectives for the Greater Barcelona Region, most structures on ﬂoodplains, steep slopes, agricultural landscapes, and the emerald network need to be gradually removed. (Exceptions include certain major historical/cultural structures, farm-related buildings, park-management buildings, bridges/viaducts, and some roads.) A wide range of approaches from incentives to regulations should be helpful in accomplishing success.

Rest of the region Excluding the areas identiﬁed in the plan as being especially important for the future, the rest of the region remains as appropriate to accommodate some growth and development. Constraints on development over this extensive area are few and fairly obvious. Don’t build in ﬂoodplains or on steep slopes, and avoid valuable habitats or damaging populations of rare species (normally places to maintain natural woody vegetation). Do build wisely after thinking both locally and regionally. Transportation and industry

This section introduces several key dimensions of surface transportation and different types of industry, with solutions outlined in three areas: (1) trafﬁc, public transit, and municipalities; (2) rail, trucking, highways, and wildlife; and (3) industry: large, medium, and small.

Traffic, public transit, and municipalities Rail lines and numbers of people transported appear to be lower in the Greater Barcelona Region than in many comparable parts of Europe. Vehicular trafﬁc is expected to grow in the vicinity of cities worldwide, but with fewer railroads, it could grow enormously in the GBRegion. Three strategies will help limit

263

264

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic vehicular traffic growth: (1) reduce commuter trafﬁc by strengthening the nice pattern of many municipalities that have light and medium industry on the edge of town, easily accessible for employees by walking and biking; (2) create walkable/bikable municipality and neighborhood people-parks on the edges of and near towns; (3) invest in public transport systems, such as light rail, small-bus systems, or modular-bus rapid transit, in the region. Attractive stations within walking distance of residential areas and with ample parking should reduce trafﬁc. Rail, trucking, highways, and wildlife In a preceding section, seven areas in the GBRegion were targeted as especially promising for future growth (El Vendrell, Igualada, Manresa, Vic, Mataro/Argentona, Llobregat West, and the Lower Anoia) (Color Figure 44). If signiﬁcant growth occurs in these areas, it is important to establish appropriate rail and highway infrastructure early, both for long distance and for public transport plus highway access to serve local residential, commercial, and industrial areas. A speciﬁc transportation plan that ﬁts within, and is consistent with, the GBRegion land-mosaic plan is a priority. A truck distribution center or hub on the outskirts of major cities permits long-distance trucks to load and unload goods, then taken by smaller vehicles on streets throughout the city. Also farmers deliver products to the trucking center, which are transported long distance or into the city. It may be useful to develop a trucking hub in the Lower Anoia for convenient access to the western side of Barcelona and the municipalities near the Llobregat (Color Figure 44) (Forman 2004a). Busy highway corridors across the land are effectively wide strips of concentrated ecological impacts (Rosell Pages and Velasco Rivas 1999, Forman et al. 2003, Iuell et al. 2003, Trocme el al. 2003). Moreover, highway corridors function as major barriers that subdivide the land both for people and wildlife. Landscape connectivity for larger animals and for people to cross highways requires wildlife underpasses or overpasses. (Seven massive overpasses [false tunnels] were observed in the GBRegion.) If designed properly, such wildlife overpasses (and underpasses) are quite effective for crossing by boar, badger, geneta, roe deer, larger deer species, as well as people (Rosell Pages and Velasco Rivas 1999). Twelve locations are pinpointed as especially strategic for new highway crossings for wildlife and people (Color Figure 41). Where a green corridor connecting emeralds crosses a busy highway, a minimum of two underpasses or overpasses is appropriate to provide ﬂexibility. Effective, even innovative, designs of wildlife passages over or under a highway require the combined expertise of animal behavior and engineering.

Built areas and systems Industry: large, medium, and small Light and medium industry, as a major economic force for the GBRegion, is widely dispersed across the land, commonly on the outskirts of municipalities, and thus conveniently located for employment. In contrast, older medium industry is often aligned along streams, and older heavy industry along rivers, one of the key reasons aquatic ecosystems are so degraded. However, today fuel, electricity, water, and space for waste treatment, as key resources for industry, are widely distributed across the land. Relocation of older stream-based medium industries to the edges of appropriate towns and cities would greatly improve natural systems in the GBRegion. Heavy industry is also very important to the economy of the region, and the most promising approach appears to be relocation to one or more new heavy-industry center. Here modern energy-efﬁcient, water-efﬁcient, and minimalpollution conditions could be established. Some waste-treatment needs of industries are compatible and can be pooled in one area. Two types of heavy industry would be especially appropriate for such a center: (1) existing industry from along major streams and rivers, especially the Tordera and Llobregat (Color Figure 44); and (2) attractive new clean industry that supports new jobs and economic growth. The optimum location for a heavy-industry center appears to be somewhere in the Lower Anoia area (general area around Piera and surrounding towns) on relatively ﬂat terrain generally away from streams and rivers (Color Figure 44) (Forman 2004a). Good highway access and rail lines (also to the port if essential) could be efﬁciently developed for transport of materials and goods. Also, convenient public transport and highway access to different municipalities should provide for diverse dependable employment. An alternative strategy would be to provide two or more heavy-industry centers, for example, on the north sides of El Vendrell and/or Manresa. One existing stretch of the Llobregat River valley from north of Martorell to south of Sant Andreu de la Barca with considerable heavy industry is of particular concern. Apparently the most severe air pollution in the region, especially particulates, NOX, and SOX, is centered here (Acebillo and Folch 2000). Preponderant winds are from the northwest, west and southwest, so pollutants are carried directly downwind to the densest population in the Barcelona metropolitan area and the Valles. River water quality is extremely poor from this area downriver in the Lower Llobregat ﬂoodplain. Riverside locations vacated by industry would provide great opportunities to enhance the Lower Llobregat area, and also for ﬂood reduction, the development of attractive local people parks, and perhaps new minimal-polluting development.

265

266

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic

Figure 10.1 Edge park concept for a town or small city in the urban-region ring. For the numerous outward-expanding towns often present in an urban region, generic solutions such as illustrated may be tailored to each town’s distinctiveness. The edge park design (here an allee and series of small ‘‘outdoor rooms”) highlights four values: (a) greenspace amenity for the existing adjoining neighborhood; (b) amenity for a future adjoining neighborhood that develops on the outside; (c) corridor for movement of some species; and (d) connection to a stream corridor which commonly slices across the land and into a town, thus facilitating species movement and a potential walking-trail system. Also note the compact town development and the node of small and medium industry at the edge of town, providing ready access to employment and limiting commuter-vehicle trafﬁc. Adapted from Taco I. Matthews drawing (Forman 2004a).

Nature and people in municipalities

Two quite different targets are addressed here. First, for the numerous towns and small cities present, are attributes which, when multiplied manyfold, may have a major cumulative effect across the region. Second outlines the solution for the most controversial spot in the region, the lower Llobregat ﬂoodplain delta right next to the city.

Towns and small cities Towns and small cities in the region often show a rather nice logic. A historic distinctive residential and shopping core is surrounded by newer multi-story residential and commercial areas, and on the edge of the built-up area, small and medium industry of recent decades is aggregated in spots, and

Built areas and systems agriculture (sometimes combined with forest) surrounds the area (Figure 10.1) (Forman 2004a). Highways pass by and/or enter the town. That generalized pattern provides nearby employment and is convenient for residents. The Greater Barcelona Region contains numerous towns and small cities, so solutions at this scale (some introduced earlier) for people and nature have a large cumulative effect: (1) the green net around nearby growing towns is composed of relatively narrow vegetation, farmland, and/or parkland strips; (2) compact, rather than dispersed, growth within the area of a municipality protects natural systems, agriculture and cultural resources, and helps create a sense of community; (3) a ribbon connecting large emeralds contains a walking path accessible to local residents; (4) a green corridor may have a pearl as a small patch of vegetation next to which a people park could be created for the municipality; (5) linear parks along the edge of towns would enhance adjacent neighborhoods by providing shaded walkways and benches, playgrounds, and small areas for active sports (Figure 10.1); (6) convenient walkability, bikability, and public transportation will help reduce trafﬁc congestion and effects; (7) separation of human sewage pipes from stormwater drainage pipes in all future development provides many local water-quality beneﬁts; (8) stormwater drainage pipes and other opportunities exist to create tiny or small wetlands in a municipality to greatly beneﬁt wildlife and nature appreciation for residents.

The Llobregat and us The Llobregat River is the great river of history and of the Greater Barcelona Region. Today one of the impressive cities of the world lies next to the river valley, and almost all travelers in and out cross it. Yet the river and its ﬂoodplain lie nearly invisible to travelers and residents alike. Imagine creating a world-class great park that brings the river valley alive for all to see and enjoy right next to the impressive city. (Color Figure 44; Forman 2004a). Attractive overpasses passing over transportation corridors to a glorious magnet on the ﬂoodplain overlooking the river, with its cleaner and greater ﬂowing water. Promenades, picnic areas, ball ﬁelds, children’s playgrounds, nature cafs. Family-food gardens, small-market farms, community-group gardens. Wetlands, biodiversity, abundant visible birds, migration stops. Highlights of history, culture, and heritage. Loop roads, bike routes, jogging and walking trails. Water features, reﬂection ponds, high points, stunning inspirational views. Everything in the park designed to let the occasional big ﬂoodwater pass by. With such a vision, the surrounding area could expect an economic boon. Real-estate value would skyrocket in places. Most family food-gardens and market-gardening

267

268

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic would continue as a productive setting for the park. Overall quality of life would noticeably rise. Two of my experiences there are shared. First, I saw the exact spot where Barcelona gets 40 % of its water, and despite the adjacent water-treatment facility, I will continue drinking bottled water. Second, nearby I was treated to a view of a dozen species of beautiful water birds in the Llobregat, with three ﬂamingos standing tall. Unforgettable. Finally, a symbol or ﬂagship identity for the great park is useful. For example, the ships of history tied the city and its river to the Mediterranean and the world. The park could highlight huge concrete-and-steel Greek, Roman, Spanish, Columbus’, and Catalan ships facing up the Llobregat, as if ‘‘at anchor on the ﬂoodplain,” and for the public to walk up on. Clearly visible to Montjuic, Collserola, and Llobregat West, as well as to highway motorists, train travelers, and airport travelers, even at night, the Great Park ‘‘BarcaBarcos” would grab attention and be memorable.

Three plan options for the region Three plans are presented for the GBRegion as a whole (Forman 2004a). A ‘‘Solid Plan” is considered to be the least ambitious plan that warrants reasonable conﬁdence of meeting the objectives at the beginning of this report. The ‘‘Most-promising Plan” is stronger (yet within a feasibility constraint), contains more ﬂexibility and stability, and seems relatively certain to attain the objectives. Finally, the ‘‘Minimal Plan” is, as suggested, considered to be the minimal solution that may attain the objectives, but success is less certain. The Solid Plan is summarized in some detail, and then the three plans with solutions are brieﬂy compared. The Solid Plan and a comparison with alternatives

The following are 15 major dimensions of the Solid Plan: (1)

(2)

(3)

Ten large emeralds widely distributed across the GBRegion are the crown jewels of natural systems and nature, providing numerous resources to people, from water supply to ﬂood control, biodiversity, and heritage values. The emeralds are interconnected with several types of connections, thus providing for wildlife movement, people walking/hiking routes, and stability for biodiversity through time and surprises. Six large different food-producing areas are protected and provide stability for the future.

Three plan options for the region (4)

(5)

(6) (7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)

(13)

(14)

Seven agriculture--nature parks are established to maintain somewhat different farming in smaller areas, add regional stability, and maintain important successional habitats that are progressively disappearing in the region. More clean water is available in the Ter and Foix reservoirs and in the Tordera and Llobregat rivers, due to steep-hill-slope protection, strategic stream-corridor protection, expansion of riparian vegetation that recharges groundwater/aquifers along streams, removal of some industry along rivers, and separation of stormwater and sewage drainage systems in strategic locations. Much-restored aquatic ecosystems, with associated ﬁsh, herons, and ﬁshermen, in rivers and streams are present for the same reasons. Flooding danger is reduced with steep-hill-slope protection, strategic stream-corridor protection, increased riparian vegetation in and along key streams, and basin parks along lower portions of the Llobregat, Tordera, and gullies in the Maresma. A large increase in wetlands and associated biodiversity is accomplished in the Tordera and Llobregat ﬂoodplains/deltas (due to land protection for wetland restoration), and in local valleys across the region (due to outﬂows from stormwater drainage systems). Five satellite cities (El Vendrell, Igualada, Manresa, Vic, Mataro/ Argentona) are targeted for potential future growth where ecological impacts would be relatively low. The Llobregat West area is targeted for potential future expansion for the Barcelona metropolitan area, where ecological impacts would be comparatively low. The Lower Anoia is highlighted for a potential heavy-industry center (especially for relocation of industry from along the Llobregat and Tordera rivers, and to attract new industry) and perhaps a trucking transportation center, where ecological impacts would be comparatively low and socioeconomic beneﬁts great. Six green-net areas are established to maintain the distinctive identities of municipalities threatening to coalesce and to provide nearby nature (Lower Anoia, Western Valles, Central Valles, Eastern Valles, Maresma Coast, and Southwest Coast). Moderation of trafﬁc growth is addressed with people parks and light- and medium-industry on municipality edges, plus expansion of convenient rail lines and stations. Several critical locations are improved by the gradual removal of misplaced buildings that degrade natural systems and associated human uses.

269

270

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic (15)

A major opening of Barcelona and neighboring municipalities to a magniﬁcent Great Park in the impressive Llobregat River ﬂoodplain is established.

The Solid Plan, Most-promising Plan, and Minimal Plan all provide numerous beneﬁts to natural systems and people, and are considered likely to achieve the stated objectives (Forman 2004a). Yet major differences exist (Table 10.1). Overall, compared with the Solid Plan, the Most-promising Plan adds a range of major beneﬁts for the GBRegion, especially: a stronger emerald network; retention of more agriculture and nature in the Valles; stronger protection of natural systems and nature in the Tordera River watershed; enhanced ﬂood control; greater protection of the Foix and the Ter reservoirs; and enhancement of the Llobregat River. The Minimal Plan may attain the objectives stated at the outset of the report, but relative to the Solid Plan, the primary losses are: eliminates two of the ten emeralds; weakens several of the connections between emeralds; leaves the southwestern portion of the GBRegion poorly served for natural systems; essentially loses the Vic Valley (and slightly weakens the Penedes) as a scarce valuable large agricultural landscape; loses the green nets that provide nature in rapidly growing areas, and prevent coalescence of municipalities with loss of identity; and reduces the magniﬁcence and quality of the Great Park for Barcelona and neighboring municipalities. A 64-page portion of the report maps and discusses planning solutions for each of 16 Sections within the Greater Barcelona Region (Forman 2004a). Sections were selected for convenience and clarity of presentation: Calaf Valley; Manresa Valley; Cardona-Sallent Area; Serralada Transversal--Llucanes Area; Vic Valley; Igualada-Miralles Area; Montserrat-Sant Llorenc-Montseny; Foix-Penedes; Garrafl’Ordal; Valles-Collserola; Granollers-Sant Celoni Valley; Lower Tordera Valley; Maresma; Lower Llobregat Floodplain; Llobregat Delta; Barcelona. These do not represent additional plans for each section, but rather portray more clearly the details and combined solutions for the three regional plans.

Flexibility and adaptability for regional stability

Flexibility to ‘‘roll with the punches” and adaptability to gradually change over time remained as an underlying planning goal. Adaptability in this case is, to a certain extent, a function of people and their institutions. However providing ﬂexibility on the land may increase the options for adapting to change. At a general level, systems, as networks with components connected by ﬂows, are a useful way to provide ﬂexibility. Many systems, especially those dominated by living organisms, provide adaptability. Nature’s system (the emerald network),

Three plan options for the region Table 10.1 Major differences in the three plan options for the Greater Barcelona Region Mostpromising

Solid

Minimal

Plan

Plan

Plan

11

10

8

Number of large natural-vegetation-patch emeralds

3+11

2+11

0+9

Connection types between emeralds: 1st number = reconnection

6

6

5

Number of large food-producing areas

6+1

7+0

5+0

Number of agriculture-nature parks: 1st number = small; 2nd

21

17

13

Number of small (& medium in 1st plan) PEIN-protected areas

Much

Much

Some

Streams across the GBRegion: improvement in aquatic ecosystems

Much

Much

Little

Ter River and reservoirs: more clean water and reduced

Much

Much

Little

Foix reservoir: more clean water

Much

Much

Some

Tordera River: more watershed area protected for nature, clean

Much

Some

Little

Llobregat R.: more clean water and restored aquatic ecosystems

Much

Much

Some

Wetlands with wildlife and biodiversity: restoration in Tordera

Some

Some

Little

Coastal vegetation and undeveloped coastline: restoration

Some

Little

Little

Marine littoral zone: restoration

Much

Much

Some

Landscape connectivity across highways for wildlife & people

Much

Much

None

Green-net protection in area of nearby growing municipalities.

Yes

Yes

No

Garraf to Foix reservoir to Ancosa: green ribbon

Yes

Yes

No

West and northwest of Garraf: threatened area strengthened

Yes

Yes

No

Lower Anoia: some vineyard area protected with Penedes

Yes

Yes

No

Ancosa-Miralles-Saburella area: 5 PEIN areas reconnected

Yes

Yes

No

Serra de Rubio north of Igualada: new emerald established

Yes

Yes

No

Vic Valley: protected against urbanization and fragmentation

Yes

Yes

No

North or northeast of Vic Valley: two agriculture-nature parks

Yes

Yes

No

El Moianes area: four small PEIN areas connected

Yes

Yes

No

North of Montseny: reconnection zone protected

Yes

Yes

No

Upper Tordera River Valley: reconnection zone protected

Yes

Yes

No

East of Mataro; relocate rail line away from coastline

Yes

Yes

No

El Prat/L’Hospitalet: river corridor with pearl

Yes

Yes

No

Lower Llobregat: trafﬁc rerouted for Great Park BarcaBarcos

Yes

Yes

No

Llobregat delta: coastal resources protected as a whole

Yes

No

No

El Foix River: ribbon protection of waterway above reservoir

Yes

No

No

Collserola: eliminate threat of bisection/fragmentation

Yes

No

No

Prats de Llucanes area: ribbon protection of valuable stream

Yes

No

No

Ter River watershed: extra protection for river and reservoirs

Yes

No

No

Eastern Valles: more area of agriculture and nature sustained

Yes

No

No

Santa Coloma area: ribbon protection of key Tordera stream

Yes

No

No

Maresma slopes: reduce steep-slope damage by greenhouses

Attribute provided by a plan

zones (stronger); 2nd number = ribbons

number = large integrated into, or connected to, the emerald network and valuable refugia for biodiversity nitrogen/phosphorus eutrophication problem

water, and restored aquatic ecosystems

and Llobregat ﬂoodplains/deltas and across the GBRegion

Added beneﬁts in speciﬁc areas within the GBRegion

271

272

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic agricultural system, transportation system, groundwater system, stream/river system, and economic system are all examples present in the region. Negative feedbacks in systems inherently provide stability. Also several of the systems contain a hierarchy that may also provide stability. Redundancy or multiple components is another way to offer ﬂexibility. Maintaining ﬁve major agricultural landscapes rather than fewer, four important rivers with clean water rather than one or none, ten major emeralds rather than eight, two major ﬂoodplain/delta aquifers rather than one or none, and so on, provides for stability. Optional routes for ﬂows and movements also help accomplish the broad goal. Emeralds with three or four connections to other emeralds mean that with, e.g., climate change or new urbanization pressure, species may move in different directions to more suitable locations. Still another key dimension of ﬂexibility and adaptability is diversity. Maintaining ﬁve types of major agricultural landscape, six types of natural emerald, ﬁve types of satellite city, and so forth is better than one type of each. When a disturbance or disease degrades or eliminates one type, the other four still sustain resources. Current trends are certainly threatening the future of some resources, such as water-supply reservoirs, ﬂoodplain/delta aquifers, agricultural resources, and coastal water quality in the Barcelona Region. The diverse types of ﬂexibility and adaptability built into the three plans should enhance stability for the region’s future. Major results and recommendations

Nine major results and recommendations resulting from speciﬁc analyses are listed (Forman 2004a). Other results from ﬁner and broader lenses could be highlighted. Two succinct broad conclusions are illustrative. The urban region as a distinct area matters in a big way. Natural systems and their uses in the region matter even more: (A)

(B)

(C)

The ‘‘emerald network” as the backbone of natural systems in the region is a system of connected large natural park areas, which provide aquifer protection, wildlife movement, trails for walking and recreation, nature conservation, and other beneﬁts for society. A set of diverse large agricultural areas plus smaller ‘‘agriculture--nature parks” provides food production, open land, important successional habitats, and economic ﬂexibility. Protected highest-quality stream valleys and widespread restored small wetlands signiﬁcantly enhance aquatic ecosystems, biodiversity, and paths for walking.

Three plan options for the region (D)

(E)

(F)

(G)

(H)

(I)

Three river solutions: (a) the Tordera watershed provides especially high quality nature and natural systems as a magnet for visitors and nature tourism away from the crowded coast; (b) the Ter River, its critical reservoirs, and the Foix reservoir have better protection, more clean water, and less nitrogen/phosphorus-caused pollution; (c) the Llobregat River Valley at the heart of the region has more clean water, improved aquatic ecosystems, less ﬂood hazard, and an enhanced richness of nature. A set of strategic places for growth and for limited growth is highlighted to enhance communities and to maintain or strengthen the key natural systems for the region. An array of solutions to enhance towns and small cities repeated across the region involve industry, transportation, trafﬁc, parks, streams, stormwater, sewage, wetlands, nature, recreation, and town identity and distinctiveness. An impressive park along the Lower Llobregat floodplain offering vast recreational opportunity and a visible symbol to all travelers and the world is established and appealingly linked to the people of Barcelona and many neighboring municipalities. Fine-scale spatial solutions for widely repeated small locations, i.e., gullies, streams, highways, and the edges of towns, have an especially important cumulative effect across the region. Flexibility and stability for the region’s future are provided with several strategies, including large agricultural areas, a diverse economic base, the emerald network, dispersion of natural systems, more clean water, protection of the two most important water resources, diverse ﬂoodreduction mechanisms, and relatively self-contained municipalities.

The land mosaic outlined in this Greater Barcelona Region project and plan provides for an enormous improvement in nature and natural systems, as well as human uses of them. Clearly establishing the underlying principles for the spatial solutions, and applying them to the distinctive patterns of this region, is important for one to understand, apply, explain, and defend the patterns and plans. History may record that Barcelona embarked on a pioneering trajectory in the opening decade of this century, a route that will reverberate far beyond for others to follow. The land of the Greater Barcelona Region, and its intelligent arrangement, represent capital, heritage, nature’s system, inspiration, and home. Together these provide a vibrant future. A visionary land mosaic, where nature and people both thrive long-term, lies within grasp just over the horizon.

273

274

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic Reflections two years later A series of additional instructive and important messages, some quite intriguing, has emerged in the two years since the planning project (Forman 2004a) was completed. For international readers, the concepts are useful, while the speciﬁc places and projects are included to provide real examples. These are succinctly organized around three phases: (1) the planning project process; (2) developments after plan completion; and (3) thinking about implementation and the initial steps. The planning project process

Throughout the process I worked closely with a team of three regional experts and an organizer/GIS/planning specialist. They took me throughout the region, taught me, arranged for consultations with knowledgeable leaders, provided piles of information, and openly answered my never-ending questions. All became good friends. I can only think of eight things they didn’t tell me, and the reasons are useful for such a project. (1)

(2)

(3) (4) (5)

(6) (7)

A high-speed rail line, Madrid to Barcelona to France. This was under construction, so near the beginning I asked for a map of the route and station locations. ‘‘Don’t give that to Forman,” was the chief’s response. Partly they did not know and partly the decision was politically charged, but mainly, I think, he was telling me to produce the best plan possible without being inﬂuenced by other existing or proposed plans. I liked that. A long-proposed east--west highway across the large Collserola park. Probably they did not mention it because the idea was nearly dead and construction highly unlikely. A proposed new north--south highway across Collserola. I never learned why this was not mentioned; perhaps the highway was considered unlikely. France-to-Madrid highway being built to pass through Vic. Probably not mentioning it was simply an oversight, or it got lost in our three languages. Important aquifers in the region. My team and also outside specialists searched, but came up with nothing for me. It is possible, though surprising, that the information does not exist; more likely it is buried somewhere and I needed to consult with a hydrologist. Groundwater in the Maresma area along the coast. The same reason as in the preceding case applies. Gracious wife of one of my team members is the Catalan President’s niece. Probably they did not wish to affect or complicate my work.

Reﬂections two years later (8)

Cultural symbols across the region. In this case the information was provided but, uncharacteristically, it took a very long time to appear. I later learned that in an ongoing election process the main political party opposed to the interests of many of my contacts was recommending the expansion of cultural symbols.

With the beneﬁt of two years of reﬂection plus three subsequent visits to the region and conversations with a range of people, I would have added or increased emphasis on the following issues. These are details. The plan presented, both in concept and in speciﬁcs, is almost exactly as I would present it now in hindsight: (A) (B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

(F)

(G)

(H)

(I)

(J)

If I had visited the rural tourism areas outside the Barcelona region, minor changes in the Tordera portion would have been made. I would have pointed out the value of wildlife reintroductions, as successfully done for fallow deer, stork, and otter in a large park northeast of the Barcelona region. Agriculture--nature parks were highlighted for protecting rare migratory birds, but the large natural areas are especially important to protect rare resident Catalan birds. Protected estuaries by river outlets and deltas, such as of the Llobregat and Tordera rivers, are normally important nursery sources for many shellﬁsh and ﬁsh along the coast. The France--Vic--Madrid highway under construction will relieve some truck trafﬁc from metropolitan-area highways, but will place a large industrialization and urbanization pressure tending to degrade agricultural, water, and natural resources of the Vic Valley. An infrequent major wildﬁre, such as the 1994 Castelltallat ﬁre, on the steep slopes around the three Ter River reservoirs could cause large erosion, sedimentation, water quality, and water capacity problems. A high-speed train station at Vilafranca, rather than at El Vendrell, would place large industrialization and urbanization pressures tending to degrade the valuable Penedes wine-growing area. A proposed new highway with tunnels north--south across the Collserola Park, is likely to cause fragmentation and degradation of its multiple resources so valuable to the Barcelona population and its future. The rather large Montnegre and El Corredor natural areas are still connected by surviving, but unprotected, woodland, which represents a strategic protection priority. Time constraints prevented real consideration of greenspaces within the City of Barcelona, where, in a European context, greenspace usable by

275

276

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic

(K)

(L) (M)

(N)

(O)

(P)

(Q)

(R)

(S)

people is limited. Also, converting the existing scattered green spots into a functioning system of integrated greenspaces, plants, and animals for people and nature would be of considerable value. The plastic glasshouses in the Maresma warrant fuller evaluation of locations, slopes, types, crops, beneﬁts, environmental problems, and values for the public. Groundwater and water tables across the Maresma should be elucidated for addressing the torrentes and other land-use issues there. The proposed growth area west of the lower Llobregat ﬂoodplain would be focused on the area with less-steep slopes, from about Torrelles and Santa Coloma to Gava/Viladecans/Sant Boi. A major emphasis on pioneering environmentally sensitive communities is appropriate to seriously protect natural water, soil, vegetation and biodiversity, and to make walking rather than motor vehicles central. A greater emphasis on removal of buildings (many apparently illegal) on steep slopes in and around the Collserola Park would provide a wide range of major beneﬁts. A stronger emphasis on the convergent interests in addressing the strategic area around the lower Riera de Rubi would include clean water supply for Barcelona, and connectivity for walkers and wildlife between Collserola and major conservation areas to the north and west. More insight into planning opportunities for the important Vallees landscape would be valuable, including its current distinctiveness as an agricultural landscape, the green-net concept, the recreational opportunities for a system of small woods connected by trails, a model area or two of a protected stream valley (e.g., the Conyas River), and at least partial solutions for the degraded Besos River and its tributaries. Describing the goals and regulatory conditions of the Agricultural Park would be useful, both for possible extrapolation to the Tordera ﬂoodplain and the proposed agriculture--nature Parks, but also for marketgardening next to other cities worldwide. A brief section on aesthetics in the region based on regional/local data and surveys could provide ideas for improving aesthetics in plans and projects, and also encouraging the public to take a greater interest in and care for the land and their communities. Alternatives to an expanding Barcelona airport on the best aquifer and market-gardening area in the region might include a major new location near Manresa/Igualada/Calaf or might include a few specialized or regional locations in or near the region.

Reﬂections two years later (T) (U)

(V)

(W)

(X)

In view of urbanization trends over time, the string-of-pearls connection type seems especially useful in the inner portion of the region. In view of urbanization trends over time, large underpasses or overpasses where wildlife crossing of highways is a signiﬁcant factor seem most useful in the outer portion of the region. Consistent with the urbanization models and patterns of Chapter 8, a greater emphasis on channeling future development to satellite cities seems valuable for the GBRegion. The seeds of destruction of the Penedes and Vic agricultural landscapes are conspicuously planted, yet strong planning can prevent these valuable Catalunyan resources from mimicking the former Central Valles productive landscape. In recognition of newer climate-change data and sea-level rise expectations of 0.5 to 5+ m, identifying low-elevation areas ripe for inundation and storm surges, and gradually replacing built structures there with multiple-value wetlands, appear to be an increasingly important priority. Developments after plan completion

When nearing completion, the plan was presented to specialists and the educated public at an evening presentation, with newspaper and television coverage in the following days. Several weeks later COAC, the professional association of architects and planners, reported in its bulletin on the plan and presentation, including one image of the proposed Great Park on the Llobregat ﬂoodplain. A few months later the ﬁnal plan report was turned in on time, with reviews and a few detailed revisions made shortly afterward. The report was translated into Spanish and published by a top quality Barcelona publisher, Editorial Gustavo Gili, as a 150-page, attractively designed book. The book was presented to the President, Chief Architect, and Mayor, who gave a formal talk about it to other leaders and the public at a ceremony in the new city Forum. The book was sold at bookstores in Spain, and I gave it some international exposure. Some knowledgeable interested people read and absorbed the book’s themes and solutions. Some leaders expressed support or reservations and some grassroots groups used it as support for their objectives. No big controversy erupted. Broader government, political, and personnel issues also played a role in the plan’s effect. The Mayor, with a considerable interest in the plan, had just been reelected for another term. He encouraged key people in his administration and mayors of surrounding municipalities to absorb the ideas and use the book, and displayed it at expositions. The Chief Architect, as the prime catalyst and

277

278

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic supporter of the project, wore two or three hats which progressively changed -from Chief Architect and Barcelona Regional Director, to Transportation and Urbanism Director, Barcelona Regional CEO, and Dean of the Swiss Mendrisio Architecture School -- and big intra-city issues also consumed his time. Nevertheless, several leading lights in the Barcelona Regional planning operation worked with him to accomplish signiﬁcant initiatives and begin gathering momentum. The Catalan President, originally a planner, was also just elected, but quickly he became committed to compelling national issues, while constantly balancing the differing interests of a three-party governing coalition. Still, he appointed many excellent people, including a leading geographer/urbanist, who, along with key people in the agencies from a previous long-term administration, made good progress in some areas related to the plan. Thinking about implementation and initial steps

The initial post-plan phase attempting to link a complex plan with possible implementation is inherently full of pitfalls. In this case three disparate perspectives seem useful: (1) types of responses and actions; (2) nature, food, water, and built areas; and (3) some broader messages. Types of responses and actions Most plans end up on the shelf. Yet so much here was important on the ground. Several types of responses and actions are instructive: (a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

The Mayor as a top leader touted the book and its themes, discussed proposals in it with key mayors of the region, and encouraged regional collaboration. Local groups used the plan to push agendas in certain areas, e.g., for protection and restoration of torrentes in the Maresma and against industrialization and urbanization in the Penedes. Apparently no or little movement occurred for some pieces, e.g., related to commuter rail lines, El Vendrell, and the Tordera area ecotourism opportunities. Interest was expressed in the agriculture-nature park, but the concept was not elaborated fully enough, and thus some lack of understanding was expressed. Mentioning possible models or examples, as in Switzerland and Germany, would help. Some items consistent with the plan happened without the plan playing any or much role, e.g., eliminating a proposal to pipe in water from the L’Ebro River Basin to the west, and approving a land-use plan (long in the works) for an area north of Manresa and Calaf.

Reﬂections two years later (f)

(g)

(h)

(i) (j)

Some items facilitated or catalyzed by the plan moved rapidly ahead to completion, e.g., a blue-ribbon panel report on the multi-sectoral effects of climate change. Other items facilitated or catalyzed by the plan were initiated, such as a group appointed to evaluate future transportation capacity needs within the region which would then be ﬁt to the spatial plan, work on a government policy on biological corridors and connectivity, and work on an urbanization policy for the public to consider. Some items previously on the table were energized or accelerated by the plan, e.g., a land plan being discussed for the Barcelona metropolitan area, a Catalan law of urban and land planning, a coastal zone landprotection plan with speciﬁc spots protected, removal of illegal houses on steep slopes especially on the eastern side of Collserola, and discussion of creating a regional corporation or planning commission with greater geographical coverage and mandate than the existing Barcelona Regional planning organization. Some actions have occurred that are counter to the plan, e.g., expansion of the Barcelona airport on the valuable delta. Some items consistent with the plan were not even in it, e.g., a large proposed agricultural park in the Vallees.

Nature, food, water, and built areas Consider examples of post-plan developments relative to these four key themes of the plan. Progress in the nature or emerald-network area includes: (1) acceptance of the basic emerald-network idea by several organizations/ agencies; (2) plans or progress for corridor connections both northwestward and eastward from the Collserola Park; (3) protection of small lands by Sant Celoni to increase natural connectivity with Montseny northward and the Maresma southward; (4) new corridor connection plans developed for several locations from Collserola to Serralada Transversal; (5) building permits temporarily frozen on the south side of Collserola; (6) accelerated building removal from steep slopes in Collserola; and (7) proposals for wildlife and walkers’ overpasses to cross highways in various locations. The food portion of the plan apparently has mainly brought recognition of the threats to large agricultural landscapes, including: (1) Penedes wine area threatened by industrialization, urbanization, and consequences of a possible high-speed-train station; (2) lower Llobregat ﬂoodplain and delta under a two-pronged threat, airport expansion and urbanization from adjacent municipalities; (3) towns north of Vic coalescing and pushing to link up more explicitly with Vic; (4) an accelerated east--west France--Vic--Madrid highway

279

280

The Barcelona Region’s land mosaic project threatening the Vic Valley resources; and (5) people intrigued by the agriculture--nature park concept but not fully understanding it. The water portion of the plan has mainly generated interest relative to water quantity and water quality: (1) a proposal to transfer water to the region from the L’Ebro River Basin to the west has apparently died; (2) a water expert has identiﬁed more than a dozen feasible cost-effective ways to increase clean water in the region; and (3) a few of the ways involve cleaning up some of the widespread dirty surface water in streams, rivers, and reservoirs. The built area and systems portion of the plan also relates to several developments: (1) the high-speed Madrid--Barcelona--France train may have stations at Vilafranca and the Barcelona airport, both locations being of exceptionally high natural-systems value; (2) the value of focusing growth on a handful of satellite cities, rather than further expansion of Barcelona, has been recognized; (3) transportation, especially rail lines, among the proposed-growth satellite cities is important; (4) at least one key mayor expressed support for the green-net concept; (5) Vic as a proposed satellite city will grow, perhaps too much, with completion of an east--west highway; and (6) eventually moving part of the Maresma rail line away from the coast makes good sense. Some broader messages Finally, some broader messages from the planning project have emerged in the past two years: (A) (B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

No movement toward implementing the plan as a whole, or establishing a trajectory for it, is presently detectable. A Barcelona colleague recently quoted a phrase, ‘‘La Caixa runs everything,” to me, apparently meaning that money or economics mainly determines what happens. Another colleague mentioned a big decision made by ﬁve political leaders in a room together who supposedly ignored all plans, apparently suggesting that actions are mainly determined by politics. A recent economic and construction boom lends urgency to several parts of the plan, especially the resources and opportunities that are moving toward a threshold of being no longer possible. Separate planning for different sectors continues, both in partial isolation and partial competition, in contrast to land planning where pieces serve multiple uses and ﬁt together into a lucid logical whole. The plan, I was told, surprised everyone because of its comprehensiveness, its potentially implementable pieces, its emphasis on a functioning Greater Barcelona Region, and its compelling portrayal of the region’s

Reﬂections two years later

(F) (G)

(H)

natural systems as important and people’s uses and dependence on them as important. It was designed to be implementable as a whole, or in pieces and over time, and with the pieces ﬁtting logically and well together. A leading water expert pointed out to the public and press that this was the ﬁrst such plan where water was one of the major central themes. An ecology and land expert made perhaps the most astute observation when he pointed out that, although the plan as a whole would be difﬁcult to implement, the new ideas have changed the frame of reference both for thinking about the region and its natural resources, and for all future plans ahead. Finally, what’s the value of doing a plan for such a large complex area as an urban region? The initial post-plan phase here highlights the following beneﬁts. A plan catalyzes new action, facilitates or accelerates ongoing action, encourages people with ideas that are consistent with the plan, discourages proposals not consistent with it, puts new ideas on the table, highlights different priorities, and changes the frame of reference for thinking and for future plans. Taken together, the cumulative value even at the initial phase is considerable. Shouldn’t all urban regions have such plans?

281

11

Gathering the pieces

Fancy being the cook with an unlimited budget preparing for an evening extravaganza. For days ahead you have visions of your visual and gustatorial creations, and begin gathering the pieces. Some fruit is not yet ripe, the ﬁsh not fresh, and your special chocolate unavailable. Yet unexpected surprises also appear -durands, anonas, sea cucumbers, and a glorious French wine. So, continually dropping and adding and sorting, you accumulate the ingredients to combine into magical culinary masterpieces. The time has arrived in this book to begin gathering the pieces for promising urban-region land mosaics. The countless and inﬁnitely diverse patterns appear from all of the preceding chapters and elsewhere. This chapter only begins the gathering process, as the reader, like the cook, will accumulate many other useful components, before ﬁtting them together into masterpieces. The lead-off section (Settings and forms of urban regions) uses a big-picture lens to identify useful patterns and processes. Then the section (Ability to extrapolate the Barcelona solutions) evaluates which of the many patterns provided for Barcelona (Chapter 10) apply widely to urban regions. The third section (Local communities, ecology) and planning, highlights the importance of the ﬁnerscale building blocks in understanding and creating an urban region. The ﬁnal section begins to explicitly evaluate the diverse pieces of the puzzle, placing them in three piles (The good, the bad, and the interesting).

Settings and forms of urban regions Identifying major urban-region types is useful, both to get past the inﬁnite variations evident around thousands of cities, and to identify some common threads or themes of wide applicability. Four broad categories of urban-region

282

Settings and forms of urban regions types are introduced. The ﬁrst two (Riverside cities and coastal cities) highlight the physiographically determined setting, and its implications for process and pattern in an urban region. The third category (Metro area and urban-region ring) focuses on the primary internal form of an urban region, which affects ﬂows and land use. The fourth grouping (Other diverse types of urban regions) is effectively a basketful of delicacies waiting to be examined for their interesting patterns and processes. Most of the urban-region types identiﬁed in this section are illustrated in Color Figures 2--39. A ﬁnal section (Effect of and effect on other regions) places an urban region in the context of other regions, near and far. This emphasizes interactions and the role of the boundary between regions. Overwhelmingly urban regions manifest a rather rounded compact form, mainly a result of urbanization from a downtown nucleus plus strong inﬂuences spreading outward over the surroundings. In fact, the basic spatial model for an urban region is a donut. In the donut model, the hole represents the all-built metropolitan area and the delicious portion around the hole is the urban-region ring (Figure 11.1).

Riverside and coastal cities

Riverside cities The most prominent modiﬁcation of the basic model form is a slice or line through the donut’s center, representing a major river. The consequences and insights from this sliced-donut form, with river bisecting city and metropolitan area, are considerable. Riverwater ﬂows one way, entering the urban region at a point on its boundary, ﬂowing across the ring, entering the metro area, leaving the metro area, and ﬂowing out of the region. Thus a mass of clean water or polluted water from an adjacent region enters at a point. Land uses in the urban-region ring then commonly add agricultural runoff and perhaps stormwater pollutants to the river water. The metro area normally adds industrial pollutants, sewage outﬂow, and much more stormwater pollution to the river. Polluted water extends far downriver across the urban-region ring, and may continue into the adjoining region. In addition, the two halves of the urban region tend to tilt toward one another, with streams ﬂowing across the surfaces to the river. Streams that ﬂow into the metro area usually disappear, as streamwater combines with polluted stormwater and ﬂows through pipes into the river. Hence the arrangement of land uses across the region may affect each stream, and each river section, differently. Upriver of the metro area, riverwater is normally cleanest, so natural vegetation cover such as forest/woodland in this portion of the region has

283

284

Gathering the pieces

Figure 11.1 Donut model variations representing major structural and functional differences among urban regions. Straight line within urban region is a major river and line on edge of region is a seacoast.

particular value in maintaining a relatively clean river. That enhances nearby recreation/tourism opportunity and sometimes water supply. Natural vegetation across the downriver land can provide clean water that dilutes and helps clean the polluted riverwater. Fish moving along the river are typically blocked by severe water pollution downriver of, or in, the metro area. Yet if riverwater is clean enough, ﬁsh

Settings and forms of urban regions populations moving from stream to stream may be sustained, a goal especially attainable in the upriver portion. The sliced-donut form provides insight into key locations for numerous other characteristics of importance to natural systems and their uses by society -groundwater to provide clean water supply, ﬂood hazard areas, riverside recreation sites, where riparian vegetation can have the greatest beneﬁt, areas to protect aquatic ecosystems, and the best and worst areas for urbanization. The following sliced-donut types represent variations on the basic model, each with readily estimated implications for people and nature: Large river bisecting city (and metropolitan area). Bangkok, Brisbane (Australia), Paris, Cairo, Columbus (USA), Delhi, Edmonton, Novosibirsk (Russia), Bamako, Rome, Warsaw City located at intersection of large rivers. Lyon (France), Minneapolis/St. Paul (USA), St. Louis (USA), Portland, Seville (Spain) City overwhelmingly on one side of a river. Quebec, Vienna, Memphis (USA) City in a major valley between high ridges. Caracas, Bogota, Zaragoza (Spain), Guatemala City, Kayseri (Turkey), Grenoble (France) City on a delta. St. Petersburg, Karachi, New Orleans (USA), Rangoon (Myanmar/Burma), Rotterdam (Netherlands), Cairo, Cuttack, Lagos, Vancouver (Canada), Calcutta, Shanghai

Coastal cities Flattening one side of a donut to represent a coastline makes the donut model work well for coastal cities. The flattened-donut form varies in the degree of ﬂattening and thus length of coastline. An extreme ﬂattening creates a semicircular metro area and region, such as Barcelona or Toronto. The city is located on the coastline subject to, e.g., hurricanes/cyclones, tsunamis, and underground saltwater intrusion, but also with the glories of a seaside or lakeshore location. More moderate donut-ﬂattenings represent conditions where the city is set back from the coast, somewhat protected from the big problems just mentioned. A second geometric component of the ﬂattened donut is to add the central river slice or line so that it is perpendicular to the coastline. Most coastal cities originated where a river met the sea or a large lake. A third key spatial component, an indentation or nibbled-out area at the intersection of the lines, mimics the typical coastal bay or natural harbor present where a river meets the sea. In short, the flattened-sliced-indented donut model represents most coastal urban regions.

285

286

Gathering the pieces Just as for the riverside cities, these coastal donut geometries are good indicators of how the urban region is structured and how it works. The directional river ﬂow, tilted land surfaces, and stream ﬂows as described above are evident. In addition, along the coast the land commonly tilts and streams ﬂow toward the sea. Water from the urban area pollutes a harbor or bay, especially one with limited circulation. Irrespective, pollution normally extends into the near-shore area beyond the coastline, where polluted water is then spread by currents or wind particularly in one direction along the coast. A coastal microclimate, often extending inland 5 km (3 mi) or more, brings haze or fog, on- or off-shore breezes, and cooler or warmer conditions, which change seasonally according to the temperature difference between seawater and land. Coastlines in an urban region are usually lined with recreational resort development, and protected natural areas along the coast tend to be small and ever-threatened by human activities. Also coastal cities commonly have a ‘‘ﬂattened semicircle” major highway around them for through travel and transport along the coast. Onshore winds and storms and waves threaten and periodically damage coastal areas. Low-lying areas where river meets sea, especially around bays, formerly were largely wetlands, but today often much urbanized. Flooding from coastal storms, particularly at high tide, tends to cover these low areas. Ironically, the river brings ﬂoodwaters from inland storms to the same low areas. In addition, the direction of prevailing winds indicates much about a region. Downwind of a metro area, considerable air pollution (and sometimes a bit more rain) is common, so recent development may be more on the upwind side. Wind direction is critical in locating airports and ﬂight patterns, and reducing hazards such as a sudden large pollutant release from a nuclear power plant. Furthermore the upwind side of an urban region is strongly inﬂuenced by conditions in the adjoining region, from eroded-soil particulates to wildﬁre, industrial pollution, or cooling by a large lake or forested area. In short, the ﬂattened side of the donut, as well as the central slice, indentation, and prevailing wind, provide considerable insight into pattern, process, ecology, and planning in an urban region. The following represent variations on the coastal city theme: Coastal city without a prominent bay. Barcelona, Toronto, Chicago, Rabat (Morocco), Algiers Coastal city with a prominent bay. Buenos Aires, San Diego, Marseilles, Lagos, Helsinki, Guayaquil (Ecuador), Tampa (USA), Lisbon Coastal city with islands providing partial storm-protection. Kuala Lumpur, Boston, Port Moresby (Papua New Guinea), Stockhom, Seoul

Settings and forms of urban regions City on a peninsula. Manado (Indonesia), Freetown (Sierra Leone), Monrovia (Liberia), Beira (Mozambique) Coastal city on a strip between water bodies or mountain ranges. Miami, Kobe (Japan) City just upriver from coast, typically subject to floodwaters from both directions. Bangkok, London, Sapporo, Kuala Lumpur Metro area and urban-region ring

The inner-edge-and-hole of the donut model also tells us much about an urban region. Thus a large expanding metropolitan area in the center tends to squeeze a narrow urban-region ring, which sometimes is also squeezed by urbanization in an adjoining region. Narrow rings are limited in resources, such as appropriate space for a water-supply source, sufﬁcient recreation/tourism sites, a suitable heavy-industry-center location, market-gardening areas, biodiversityrich large natural areas, and differing farmland landscapes. More generally, narrow rings around a large metro area lack ﬂexibility and stability for a region’s future. Interestingly, the edge or border between metro area and urban-region ring is a useful indicator of key ﬂows and movements in the region (Forman 1995). A compact metro area may largely result from a greenbelt or urban growth boundary or certain transportation planning. Compact metro areas may have much movement within them, but relatively little or modest radial movement out to, and in from, nearby unbuilt areas. As a consequence, the nearby surrounding urban-region ring seems to maintain its own functioning land-use integrity. In contrast, a metro area with several or many prominent built lobes and greenspace wedges suggests considerable interaction in radial directions between metro area and urban-region ring. People living in the city have ready walking/biking access to greenspace that connects them to surrounding countryside for recreation. Conversely, wildlife and other species use the coves to continually move inward and enrich city parks. The cooling effect of greenspace wedges minimizes a city’s heat-island effect, and wind channeled along certain coves helps keep the city’s air clean. Also, built lobes usually contain signiﬁcant radial transportation routes connecting city and surroundings. The compact form of a metro area may result in part from the absence of a major ring highway. Ring highways seem to open up the surrounding inner portion of the urban-region ring to development. A diffuse metro area border often results. The diffuse border suggests the presence of an intensive network of local roads, perhaps a sprawl of homes on relatively large lots, extensive habitat loss, fragmentation of natural areas, proliferation of non-native species,

287

288

Gathering the pieces degraded stream networks, and polluted groundwater for wells. Indeed over time the ring road frequently gets increasingly absorbed by a growing metropolitan area. In summary, the metro area and urban-region ring category, like the categories for riverside cities and coastal cities, provides important insight into the structure, functioning, and potential planning of urban regions. The donut’s two inner-edge-and-hole indicators are the form of the inner edge of the urbanregion ring, plus the relative size of the metro area and urban-region ring. These are illustrated as follows: Large metro area and narrow urban-region ring. Philadelphia, Chicago Small metro area and wide urban-region ring. Abeche, East London, Erzurum Compact metro area and wide urban-region ring. Bucharest, Winnipeg (Canada), Edmonton Metro area and urban-region ring interlinked by major greenspace coves and built lobes. Moscow, Stockholm, Brasilia, Santiago, Kuala Lumpur Diffuse border between metro area and urban-region ring. Atlanta, Milan (Italy), San Antonio (USA), Washington, San Jose (Costa Rica) Metro area delimited by protected greenspace of urban-region ring. London, Portland

Other diverse types of urban regions

Using the same approach and logic as for the preceding three urbanregion categories, the reader can readily learn much about the diverse urbanregion types following. In fact, the patterns that emerge in this whole section on settings and forms of urban regions are easily gathered together to understand and creatively plan regions: Prominent volcano providing aesthetics and recreation (and air pollution). Naples, Kagoshima, Kayseri (Turkey), San Jose (Costa Rica), Sapporo, Mexico City Metro area adjacent to mountain range. Florence (Italy), Kobe (Japan), Denver (USA), Santiago, Sapporo, Valencia (Venezuela), Calgary (Canada) City ringed by mountains. Guatemala City, Grenoble (France), Ulaanbaatar City on a prominent environmental gradient. Madrid, Nairobi, Jabalpur (India), Kuala Lumpur Metro area ringed by a natural vegetation matrix. Iquitos, Tehran, Jodhpur (India), Abeche Metro area ringed by a cropland matrix. London, Nantes, Bangkok, Indianapolis (USA)

Settings and forms of urban regions No major surface water body by metropolitan area. Madrid, Mexico City, Tehran, Bogota, Beijing, Athens, Quito, Johannesburg, La Paz, Santiago, Abeche Large wetland by metro area. Buenos Aires, Miami, New Orleans (USA) Metro area subdivided into major sections by water or greenspace. Brasilia, Birmingham (USA), Asahikawa (Japan), New York, Amsterdam Urban region strongly affected by a nearby city. Glasgow, Baltimore (USA) Urban region with megacity (>10 million population) in center. Delhi, Shanghai, New York, Jakarta, Tokyo Urban region within a megalopolis of major cities. Osaka (Japan), Philadelphia, Utrecht (Netherlands) Urban region as one of a ring of cities surrounding a large greenspace. Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Utrecht, The Hague (Netherlands) Urban region in two or more nations, states, or provinces. San Diego/Tijuana, Strasbourg (France), Ottawa, Portland, Philadelphia, Cincinnati (USA) Urban region in a national district/territory. Canberra, Mexico City, Washington Form of metro area and urban-region ring strongly affected by regional planning. Canberra, Brasilia Metro area strongly molded by regional planning but now pattern much obscured by urbanization. Curritiba (Brazil), Ankara, Washington, New Dehli, Chandigarth (India) Urban region showing some evidence of regional planning. London, Berlin, Beijing, Sapporo, Singapore, Rome, Moscow

Effect of and effect on other regions

A city’s region never exists in isolation, but is tightly linked to regions both adjoining and distant. The arrangement of outside regions largely determines the directionality of inputs and outputs, both positive and negative, for an urban region. Such directional ﬂows in turn strongly inﬂuence patterns and processes within an urban region. All sorts of things move or ﬂow across boundaries, from groundwater and air pollutants to wildlife, walkers, cars, goods transported by trucks, trains, stream water, and ﬁsh. The source locations, directions of movement, rates of ﬂow, and sink locations of these are so diverse that detailed observation and mapping are normally required for planning. Still, the ﬂows are usefully grouped into three spatial categories (Forman 2004a): edge area of a region, adjacent region as a whole, and distant regions.

289

290

Gathering the pieces The edge area just inside and outside the urban-region boundary is a key zone because sources are so close to, and effects so likely to cross, the boundary. Boundary issues often require careful watching, as ﬂows and movements can quickly enter or leave a region. Often clusters of sources and ﬂows can be identiﬁed at a number of locations around a region’s boundary that can be targeted for management and solution (Forman et al. 2004). Furthermore some urbanregion boundaries gradually expand or shrink. That may add, or remove, certain boundary issues from a region, and therefore noticeably alter the region’s concern or responsibility for an issue. Flows and movements originating from a metropolitan area or major portions of an urban region are often more important than boundary issues. Upon crossing a regional boundary, these ﬂows may affect most of the edge portion of a region or diffuse widely across the region. A particular urban region, of course, focuses primarily on the ﬂows entering rather than leaving. Yet, in a broader multi-region context, entering and leaving effects are both important. While interactions between adjoining regions are more obvious, distant changes can also signiﬁcantly affect an urban region. An economic giant that sneezes may ﬂood a distant region with certain goods, or open a big new market. A government policy change involving immigration or transportation type, for instance, may strongly reverberate in a distant region. Environmental change elsewhere may alter migratory bird patterns, livestock disease spread, public health problems, or nature-based tourism. In short, this section highlights the importance of three areas -- boundary edge zone, adjoining regions, and distant regions -- for understanding the ecology and planning the future of an urban region.

Ability to extrapolate the Barcelona solutions Ecologists generally do not count the needles on a giant spruce tree or the eye-blinks of an eagle or the ants caught by an aardvark just to learn more about the species. To do such analyses for even a thousandth of the species on Earth would require eons of drinks from a ‘‘fountain of youth.” Rather, the ecological measurements, along with the exhilaration of ecological discovery, are mainly made to develop principles and theories that apply widely to other species. So it is with the detailed look at the Barcelona Region in the preceding chapter (Forman 2004a). How many of the solutions outlined in it apply only to that region? Do any of the solutions extrapolate effectively to cities around the world? Any solution with wide applicability could be quite useful for understanding and planning.

Ability to extrapolate the Barcelona solutions Each of the Barcelona Region pieces outlined in Chapter 10 is therefore placed in one of three categories: (1) solutions widely applicable to urban regions worldwide; (2) solutions widely applicable to certain sets of urban regions; and (3) solutions limited in applicability to the distinctive Barcelona Region. Solutions widely applicable to urban regions worldwide

Twelve results from the Barcelona analysis (see Chapter 10 and Color Figures 2--39) fall readily into this category. These solutions seem applicable to most large and small cities irrespective of geography, land use, and culture: The emerald network as the backbone of natural systems applies well in virtually all urban regions. Where the matrix is natural vegetation (Iquitos, Tehran), the emerald network represents a spatial framework of priority areas to protect as urbanization and other land changes proceed over time. Where the matrix is cultivation (London, Chicago), the spatial framework indicates priority areas for restoration of natural systems. If emeralds are presently distributed across the urban-region ring, e.g., due especially to topography and geology (Barcelona), their enhancement, connection, and protection is the challenge. Five types of connections provide ﬂexibility for connecting the large natural-area emeralds, a useful approach for the usual urban region with numerous built areas. Diverse connection types that provide connectivity across the land for both trail walkers and wildlife are especially valuable in the face of ongoing urbanization. Agriculture--nature parks are mainly established on aggregations of small farms, which exist in almost all urban regions (partially illustrated in parts of Switzerland and Germany [Pegel 2007]). A set of protected agriculture--nature parks would be particularly valuable where the urban-region ring is small, or the matrix has been relatively monotonized by extensive agriculture (Chicago, London, Bangkok). Water-supply protection using vegetation cover applies widely, e.g., where the water source is aquifer, shallow groundwater, lake, reservoir, river, or stream. To provide relatively clean riverwater, strategic areas and stretches are targeted for natural vegetation, since covering an entire river basin with vegetation is often difﬁcult in an urban region. The vegetation-cover solution is least applicable to a large deep aquifer or a very large lake.

291

292

Gathering the pieces Protected highest-quality stream valleys are valuable in virtually all regions. In arid areas much of the water runs underground, but gullies or washes or wadis are normally useful imprints on the land surface. Targeting protection to high-priority streams is an alternative to attempting to protect all streams by regulation and enforcement, a difﬁcult task in urban regions. Restoration of small wetlands is probably valuable and feasible in all urban regions, which long ago lost most of their wetlands to draining and ﬁlling. Small wetlands, especially created on ﬂoodplains, at speciﬁc sites by the bases of hills or mountains, and at the end of certain stormwater pipes draining numerous impermeable surfaces, provide value to natural processes and many ecosystem services to society. A set of strategic places for growth applies universally in urban regions. To help channel future urbanization into particularly appropriate areas, a few well-separated satellite cities in the outer portion of the urban-region ring, and one area close to the big city may often be a good balance (see Chapter 8). A set of strategic places for limited growth, no growth, and building removal also applies universally. The solution addresses the problem of valuable sites or areas imminently threatened by urbanization. In addition, locations are pinpointed where especially damaging or inappropriate urbanization has taken place relatively recently. An array of solutions for widely repeated small locations is useful in all regions. Gullies, streams, highways, villages, and towns, which are often too numerous to analyze and plan individually, are typical locations. A few generic solutions addressing diverse human and natural systems issues are developed, and then a solution is tailored to the distinctiveness of each location. An important cumulative effect across the region can be expected. Edge parks for towns and small cities provide beneﬁts for nature as well as for both today’s residents and tomorrow’s newcomers. Therefore such parks are valuable for towns and small cities that are growing, a common case in an urban-region ring. An impressive park to protect a large nearby unappreciated area applies widely in or adjacent to metropolitan areas. Creating a monumental cultural ﬂagship park that provides an array of both human and natural values has the added beneﬁt of minimizing imminent threats to an existing valuable resource.

Ability to extrapolate the Barcelona solutions Flexibility and stability for a region’s future is a synthesizing solution that incorporates many of the others listed. From economics to aesthetics and water to biodiversity, the speciﬁc land-use solutions are, in part, determined by how well they provide ﬂexibility and stability for a region’s future. Solutions widely applicable to certain sets of urban regions

Ten Barcelona solutions (see Chapter 10 and Color Figures 2--39) ﬁt this category. For each the applicable type of urban region is indicated as follows: A set of diverse large agricultural areas applies well to regions with good agricultural soil in large patches and of different types. If a single productive soil type predominates, different landscape areas can be established by maintaining different predominant crops. The solution applies poorly in regions with only small patches of farmland soil, such as in many glaciated and arid areas. A river-watershed magnet for visitors and nature tourism applies well where the matrix, or an extensive area in the outer urban-region ring, is natural vegetation containing a large river basin or catchment. If these natural conditions no longer exist, the riverwatershed magnet solution might be a useful framework for landscape restoration. River restoration, which includes both water and valley, especially applies in regions where a river valley is upriver from the metropolitan area. Non-point pollutant sources from sewage, storm water, industry, and agriculture are signiﬁcantly reduced in part through changes in land-use pattern, including land protection. Floodplain riparian vegetation providing an array of human and natural beneﬁts applies widely in regions with streams and rivers. In hilly/mountainous terrain, woody vegetation, and other techniques can be targeted separately to upper tributaries and to lower ﬂoodplains. A package of flood-hazard-reduction techniques applies in urban regions with the threat of river or stream ﬂooding. The package addresses issues related to land and slopes, stream and river valleys, stormwater pipe systems in metro areas, and wetlands. Separate stormwater and sewage systems is a solution applicable in most urban regions where large areas have a single pipe system combining sewage wastewater and storm water runoff. Water bodies

293

294

Gathering the pieces tend to be heavily contaminated with incompletely treated human wastewater, so identifying priority areas for separating the two systems is an important step. Relocating heavy industry to efficient heavy-industry centers is particularly valuable in urban regions where heavy industry is located alongside a major water body or upwind of a population center. Gradual transfer to a heavy-industry center with efﬁcient power, water, waste disposal, and transportation is an employment and economic investment. It also enhances the water bodies and downwind communities. A truck-transport center mainly applies to urban regions without one. Centralizing the loading and unloading of goods and agricultural products by both local and long-distance trucks provides cascading beneﬁts to people as well as the environment, in the city and across the region. Large underpasses or overpasses for walkers and wildlife are applicable to regions where highways are signiﬁcant disruptions to crossing the urban-region ring by trail walkers and local residents, as well as key wildlife species (Figure 11.2). In view of ongoing urbanization, wildlife movement connectivity tends to be mainly important in the outer portion of an urban-region ring. A green-net solution applies widely to regions where many nearby growing towns and small cities are threatening to coalesce. The green net provides a multitude of people-and-nature beneﬁts at different scales from local community to region. Solutions limited in applicability to the distinctive Barcelona Region

None. All solutions provided in the land mosaic plan for the Barcelona Region, while tailored to the speciﬁcs of the region, apply widely to urban regions globally. This summary, done more than two years after plan completion, was a surprise. The widespread applicability of the Barcelona solutions seems to highlight the commonalities of urban regions. The plan addresses today’s big problems and trends, and also outlines a land mosaic with ﬂexibility to sustain the region in the future. No detailed ﬁne-scale design is involved, and no cookie-cutter homogenization is proposed. The solutions could be applied, each in a different way, to a thousand cities, and the cities would look as distinctive as ever. They might all have cleaner rivers, valuable emeralds, more efﬁcient, cleaner heavy industry, and a glorious monumental park. Yet the culture and socioeconomics in each

Local communities, ecology, and planning

Figure 11.2 Two vegetation-covered overpasses across a multilane highway. Only 12 km from center city Barcelona, these provide connectivity for local residents, hikers, and wildlife, and were built when the Ministry of Environment concluded that a new highway should not disrupt connectivity of the landscape. Carretera de los tuneles. R. Forman photo courtesy of Josep Acebillo and Marc Montlleo.

urban region will have created these in a unique manner, and in synergy with the distinctive features of that region.

Local communities, ecology, and planning Bats in the bedroom are not much fun. They brush into our hair, carry diseases, and leave messes. How odd it would be if we didn’t notice them, or just continued brushing our hair, dusting a spot here, and walking carefully there, as if nothing were amiss. Local communities, especially residential or bedroomcommuter places, have largely been ignored in this book on urban regions. Much of a region’s population lives in and takes much interest in these communities, while giant forces of urbanization, trafﬁc ﬂow, water degradation, and much more swirl across the region, seemingly unseen. Yet local communities are important building blocks of an urban region, and understanding the blocks is useful to grasp the big picture. Three types of local

295

296

Gathering the pieces communities will be examined: (a) satellite city (illustrated by Boulder, Colorado); (b) planned town in the urban-region ring (illustrated by several communities including Celebration, Florida); and (c) suburban town in the metropolitan area (illustrated by Concord, Massachusetts). The examples are relatively well-known places in the USA, not typical or representative, but providing useful insights for understanding or planning of urban regions. In each case we consider how the local community ﬁts into the patterns and processes of the broader region. Satellite city

Boulder, Colorado (population 90 000) lies in the inner portion of Denver’s (city population 555 000) urban-region ring, and at the base of the Rocky Mountains adjoining North America’s Great Plains. Most of the nearby Rocky Mountain area is federally protected land, whereas Boulder lies in one of the areas with the highest rate of expected sprawl in the nation (Burchell et al. 2005). Quality of life and environmental quality are of particular concern to Boulder residents. A ﬂagship feature of the city is its 12 000 ha (30 000 acre) open space system (Benﬁeld et al. 2001, Peter Pollock, personal communication). Highlights are a greenbelt (outlined in 1910 by Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr.), averaging about 2 km in width, and greenways slicing across the central built area to interconnect with the greenbelt. The greenways are mostly stream corridors with walking/biking trails. Small parks are present in the central area, and the greenbelt and greenways provide connectivity for species movement to and among the parks. The open space or greenspace system includes city land, state land, federal land, cemeteries, and more, whereas intensive-use spots such as ball ﬁelds are managed separately. The land is zoned with management regulations related to ownership, as well as uses such as walking, dog-walking, and bicycling (Miller and Gershman 1998). Overall the system is greatly appreciated and much used by Boulder residents, and also by residents of nearby communities. Deer populations are relatively dense and cougar (mountain lion) sightings not infrequent, but Boulderites are generally appreciative or tolerant of wildlife. The relative abundance of top predators helps maintain a diverse food web and rich biodiversity (Chapter 4). Three major goals effectively created, and are accomplished by, this greenspace system: (1) protection of natural systems, which includes: native grassland, wildlife, and biodiversity; soil erosion control; and reduction of water runoff and ﬂooding; (2) recreational opportunity, so that all residents live near a park, greenway, or greenbelt, and have ready walking access to the open greenbelt area; and (3) shaping the development of the city, which includes limiting urbanization and sprawl and ‘‘disciplining” urban growth in the central portion.

Local communities, ecology, and planning The open-space protection process was jump-started in 1959 when a ‘‘blue line” was drawn at the 1757 m elevation contour, above which water and sewer services would not be provided (Benﬁeld et al. 2001). Although some of the greenspace began as federal land, the bulk of the system was acquired by the city. In 1967 citizens decided to tax themselves, using a sales tax, to acquire land for protection. Thirty years later one could walk around the city on its protected greenbelt. The central portion of Boulder dominated by built areas has also achieved results of ecological and planning interest. In 1976 citizens chose to slow growth to 2 % by limiting the number of building permits issued annually. In 1995 citizens dropped that to 1 % growth, which, though strikingly different from surrounding rapidly growing communities, equaled the national population growth rate. New development is mainly next to existing development, a good cost saving. Inﬁll housing continues, though greenspaces are valued by citizens so opposition on a case-by-case basis limits the rate of inﬁll. Affordable housing is limited, as in most surrounding communities, despite an innovative array of approaches to overcome the problem. Spring ﬂooding problems next to the mountains have been controlled by using the diversity and arrangement of root and stem systems characteristic of native grassland, rather than by engineered structures. Commercial growth has skyrocketed. In general, job availability exceeds housing availability, so commuters arrive from surrounding communities. Signiﬁcant trafﬁc congestion occurs, both due to commuting workers and shoppers. These increases in commercial activity and trafﬁc have generated some case-by-case opposition to further commercial development. In addition to the much-used walking/biking trails, public transport across the city is relatively widespread and efﬁcient. The Boulder story offers several useful lessons. Residents can determine the kind of community, rather than vice versa. The community chooses slow growth, rather than no growth, rapid growth, or uncontrolled market growth. Open space is used to spatially deﬁne urban land, and to create a compact built area with sharp edges. A greenspace system with scattered parks, a greenbelt, and greenways interconnecting the greenbelt provides connectivity across the city for walkers, bikers, wildlife, and other species. The system also protects quite natural nearby ecosystems, which in turn provide valuable ecosystem services to the community. Boulder’s early focus on the open space of its edge is reminiscent of another magical place, Frederick Law Olmsted’s emerald necklace. This was created on the edge of Boston and is now near downtown, where today it provides important habitat, aesthetics, recreation, and connectivity for species and numerous

297

298

Gathering the pieces people. Edges of communities are where big solutions, especially greenspace beneﬁts, can often be implemented. A broader spatial view shows Boulder in a sea of coalescing communities characterized by rapidly expanding sprawl. A ‘‘green net” with greenspace corridors around town or municipality borders was proposed for an area where many expanding communities were threatening to coalesce (Chapter 10; Forman 2004a). The Boulder greenbelt would be an extreme example, because of its width, of a municipality ringed by a greenspace corridor. Ringing the local communities in Denver’s region with greenspace corridors or thin greenbelts would create a broad-scale green net that provides important value -- local recreation, nature protection, local walking trails, regional trails, connectivity for wildlife, and helping to maintain the identity and distinctiveness of each community. Regional initiatives could center around Denver, or say a county (e.g., planning begun in 1978), or even the surrounding local communities that are the most relevant to Boulder, an approach considered in the suburban town case below. Planned town

With roots in nineteenth-century utopian communities and 1960s--1970s planned communities, the idea of planned towns grows as an alternative to new sprawl in the USA. Generally referred to as ‘‘new urbanism” (or neo-traditional town planning in Britain), the development is not without its critics, who sometimes harshly note that overall it is neither new nor urban, emphasizes realestate development for proﬁt, relies heavily on private cars, produces pseudo‘‘theme parks,” is akin to a cult, and has confused ecology with green marketing. Nevertheless, the key question is how a planned town compares with the ﬁve basic alternatives: (1) values of the preceding land; (2) values of the land enhanced without a new community; (3) a sprawl community of the same area; (4) a sprawl community holding the same number of people as the planned town; and (5) a community planned so that both people and nature thrive long term. A list of pros and cons for each of the six options should be a sine qua non. Although the planned-town idea has been applied to a neighborhood within a city, suburban community in the metro-area portion of a small city (e.g., Davis, California), and a master-planned housing-development community (Vernez Moudon 1989), here we consider the typical case of a new town in the urban-region ring. Almost all the planned towns emphasize: reduced vehicle use; pedestrian-scale walkability; local recreation; water as an amenity, and often a part of stormwater management; small house lots with little lawn; houses close together, sometimes with many front porches; variable-unit townhouses and apartments; small or few outdoor private spaces; slightly narrow streets; unobtrusive garages often

Local communities, ecology, and planning entered from a back alley; manicured, rather uniform planted areas; a distinct town center with shops and restaurants; sections or neighborhoods somewhat separated by water or greenspace (e.g., riparian strip or golf course); real-estate marketing; a relatively high density of people; social interactions; upper middle class values and aesthetics; and a regulated ordered conformity produced by planning. Of course these and other emphases vary by town. For new urbanist towns these patterns emanate from 27 listed principles largely driven by land development and social community (Congress for the New Urbanism 2000, Duany et al. 2000). The social, economic, and planning dimensions are grist for much evaluation and discussion (Katz 1994, Duany et al. 2000, Lund 2003, Garde 2004). In contrast, natural systems, habitat, and environmental dimensions overall have been of tangential interest. These towns take up space, either habitats for species or places for us, so a rigorous ecological evaluation is needed. Some preliminary observations here emphasize the point. Habitat, species diversity, and rare species are largely ignored or minimized. Environmental monitoring, management, and improvement are often absent. Hydrologic groundwater protection and habitat restoration are typically unaddressed. Habitat connectivity for regional wildlife movement is normally missed. Ecological impacts of trafﬁc noise and pollutants (considerable trafﬁc results from few or distant jobs) remain unaccounted for. Adaptive management for water conservation, stormwater runoff control, energy use, and water and air pollution is generally overlooked. Consider brieﬂy some examples: Reston, Virginia was built in a rural landscape in the 1960s, then engulfed by sprawl, and recently a people-oriented small-city center with a high density of people, walkways, shops, ofﬁces, and restaurants was inserted. Over time a planned town changes, in this case a metamorphosis catalyzed by the transformed land around it. The Woodlands, Texas, begun in the 1970s with a major goal of controlling ﬂoods in the community, in one sense was a smashing success by tailoring development to the capacity of different local soil types to absorb rainwater. Natural vegetation supporting rich biodiversity remains in front yards and back yards of most houses. Yet, in the pre-landscape-ecology era, the town plan effectively designed against an important icon species, the red-cockaded woodpecker, which requires a large natural area containing large pines and thrived next door in Texas’ ﬁrst state park.

299

300

Gathering the pieces Seaside, Florida was designed to extend a long distance along, and provide close-by human access to, a coastal beach. But the beach lies in a key area for rare nesting sea turtles. The town could have been planned to minimize damage to the coastline and turtle population. Kentlands, Maryland extinguished a large meadow-grassland in an area where a regionally rare bird, the upland sandpiper, requires large grasslands to survive. Later, runoff from the new town’s concentrated impermeable surface seems to have signiﬁcantly altered existing downslope wetlands. Lake Carolina, South Carolina was built along the shore of the only relatively large lake/reservoir in the area, a location that without study can be expected to cause signiﬁcant ecological degradation locally and regionally. A token, presumably ineffective lakeshore buffer zone separates the lake and stream tributaries from the built area. Stream ﬂooding and increased lake sedimentation doubtless occur. Some large natural areas are left, apparently for future development rather than in permanent protection. Celebration, Florida is owned, built, and continuously subsidized by the Disney Corporation (best known for its cartoon ﬁlm character, Mickey Mouse), seemingly as a marketing and image investment (Beardsley 1997, Ross 1999). In addition to the usual planned town attributes, electric vehicles and abundant oft-deserted sidewalks are in evidence. Numerous tourists give a resort ﬂavor. The so-called town hall is a real-estate center, where the options of large houses, condominiums, and apartments are clearly geared to the moderately wealthy. Just as for sprawl, lots of land was consumed for these few thousand residents. Few jobs and little or no public transport are available, so vehicles are well used. Water is much in evidence, as expected where considerable wetland was degraded. Permanent conservation restrictions were placed on some large undeveloped wetland tracts. More interesting are the linkages with land elsewhere. To receive approval for the development, Disney agreed to purchase and restore habitats of an extensive distant pastureland under the eye of a major conservation organization. In developing the community, often mature trees were planted

Local communities, ecology, and planning which came from somewhere. I well remember days of moaning ﬂatbed trucks each carrying three full-length palms to Celebration, a process that converted a beautiful distant diverse savanna into monotonous pastureland. Plantings of street trees, front yards, and backyards in the town are all determined by narrow lists of approved plants. Everything outside seems rigorously manicured to ﬁt a prescribed appearance; randomness and surprises are kept out. The controlling, regulated, ordered, homogenized, predictable, and monotonous place helps select the residents, and then shape the kind of lives they live. In some ways a ‘‘theme park,” extreme Celebration highlights many unwelcome elements of planned towns. Planned-town experts can point to other places and other patterns, but would generally agree that so far ecology has not been a major priority. Yet it could be. Then planned towns, where nature and people both thrive long term, would be clearly better than the two sprawl options and the existing planned-town option presented at the outset. Until then, one must conclude that the present cases (despite some unplanned ecological beneﬁts) illustrate the typical ‘‘Nature gets the leftovers” development approach. Ecological criteria are often little more than open-space amenity or aesthetics, sometimes combined with stormwater management. No rigorous scientiﬁc meaning or use of ecological principles or standards or accountability exists. Ecology, environment, conservation, and habitat are used in superﬁcial generic ways, essentially as green marketing. Transform that, and planned towns could be a signiﬁcant solution across the land. Suburban town

Open space (greenspace) planning and protection in Concord, Massachusetts highlights three particularly useful insights for a community in its region (Ferguson et al. 1993, Forman et al. 2004): (1) broad town-wide or landscapewide patterns for identifying land protection priorities; (2) a promising approach for regional thinking and collaboration; and (3) dealing with the presence of a major highway in the community. Concord is an outer Boston suburb with a rural feel. Located 55 km northwest of downtown Boston on a commuter rail line, the town has 17 000 residents in 67 km2 (26 mi2 ). A historic town where the American Revolution began, it later became America’s nineteenth-century literary center where R. W. Emerson, L. M. Alcott, N. Hawthorne, and H. D. Thoreau (one of the roots of ecology) lived. In 1928 the town was a pioneer in passing

301

302

Gathering the pieces a zoning bylaw to help guide its growth and development, and since the 1960s natural resource and land protection have been especially important. In 1992 an ‘‘Open Space Framework” was delineated in a town plan to identify, compare, integrate, and rank the major town-wide features and the smaller special sites of open-space importance. The town-wide pattern consisted of large areas or patches of three types (built, natural, and agricultural) plus major corridors of three types (water-protection, wildlife, and human). Small special sites of greenspace importance were then mapped on the town-wide pattern. The results highlighted 25 priority places for protection, the highest priorities being to protect the essential core of large natural and agricultural areas, and secondarily major water-protection and wildlife corridors. The major patch-andcorridor network identiﬁed provides a rich array of resources and beneﬁts to residents. Then from 1992 to 2004 8 % of the town’s total land surface was protected. The exceptional value of a large natural area for biodiversity, and especially interior species, is illustrated by a study of 22 hectares within one of the town’s large natural patches (600 ha Estabrook Woods). Highlights included: forest-interior species rare in the town’s region (porcupines, ﬁshers, barred owls, black-throated green warblers, hermit thrushes, northern waterthrushes); other species of special interest (great horned owls, blue-winged warblers, several vascular plant species; two state-listed rare invertebrate species); a paucity of invasive exotic species; and more state-listed and locally rare species on an adjacent piece of the forest. This large natural area is one of only two in the Boston Region with such a dependable array of forest-interior species. In 2004 the next open-space planning process had a strong emphasis on protecting agriculture, water, biodiversity, and nature-based trail recreation. Intriguingly, it strengthened the Framework by considering three spatial scales, regional, town, and neighborhood. Since a large portion of the town’s issues involve one or more other towns, a regional approach seemed important. Yet traditional regional approaches have many familiar shortcomings, such as threat to local control, inadequate budget, short half-life, and many issues extending into a different region. Therefore a new regional approach was developed. First, a long list of ways Concord interacts with other towns showed that the bulk of the interactions over the last couple of decades were with 18 surrounding towns. Thus a functional town-centered or locality-centered region was recognized, composed of 18 surrounding localities commonly interacting with Concord at the center (Figure 11.3). In this case the local region covered an area ﬁve times the town’s diameter. Databases were gathered and maps drawn for the 19 town region showing several

Figure 11.3 Locality-centered region and rare species habitat. Eighteen towns around Concord, Massachusetts (USA) form a functional region with frequent interactions. Priority habitats for state-protected rare plant and animal species are mapped to help understand regional patterns for greenspace planning in the central town. Mapped by Matthew Barrett using 2003 Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program data. From Forman et al. (2004).

304

Gathering the pieces resources of importance to the town. These included protected open space, public trail systems, proposed regional trails, commuter rail lines, major roads, statecertiﬁed vernal pools, rare species habitat, and so forth. Also the sources of cross-boundary effects were mapped to provide insight into where boundary problems are concentrated, that is, where things just outside the boundary affect the town, and things just inside the boundary affect an adjoining town. The regional maps and the cross-boundary-effects map thus put the preceding town-wide patterns in a broader spatial context, which clariﬁed and strengthened the open-space planning priorities. This regional approach, which did not threaten local control, also capitalized on a state requirement for developing open-space plans every ﬁve years. The 2004 Concord plan with maps and with databases identiﬁed was distributed to the surrounding towns, with the expectation that they will use many of the same regional databases in their planning. Within a few years most of the surrounding towns may well be thinking, and increasingly collaborating, regionally. The third tough issue for local communities is the presence of a regional transportation route, in this town’s case a bisecting major highway with considerable trafﬁc. The 2004 planning effort highlighted the highway because its effect ramiﬁes through so much of the land and the community -- trafﬁc noise in nearby residential areas, clogged adjoining roads, accidents, road salt, pedestrian crossing hazards, hazard to bicyclists, trafﬁc noise degrading avian communities, and barrier to wildlife crossing. A range of partial solutions was proposed for each issue. Two years later the state had completed construction in Concord of its ﬁrst four wildlife underpasses. Tracking studies of animals preceded construction, and diverse wildlife species quickly began using the underpasses that connected the two halves of the town. Finally, the large patches-and-corridors framework for this suburban town closely parallels the multiple habitat conservation program for protecting biodiversity across the San Diego Region (Chapter 2), as well as the emerald network for a range of nature-and-people values in the Barcelona Region (Chapter 10). The locality-centered-region model should apply well in towns, parishes, shires, municipalities, local-government-areas, small cities, and counties. Perhaps with appropriate nudging, it could rapidly spread right across an urban region with widespread visible beneﬁts.

Good, bad, and interesting patterns in urban regions Imagine arriving at a party where the hostess has you reach into a paper bag with three types of squishy balls, feel around, and pull one out. You are delighted with the one you choose and will use it tomorrow. Alas, your

Good, bad, and interesting patterns in urban regions friend picks a different type which promptly squirts you in the eye. Then the person behind you chooses a third unusual ball, and begins pondering it. The hostess knew all along which balls were good, bad, and interesting -- and now you do too. So it is with urban regions. The beneﬁcial patterns, the detrimental ones, and those still worth evaluating for pros vs. cons are reasonably clear. There is no need for society to rediscover wheels around every city. The selected patterns listed below are mainly grounded in the Color Figures of Chapter 5, the nature--food--water graphs of Chapter 6, the built-systems--builtareas graphs of Chapter 7, the urbanization attributes and analyses of Chapter 8, the principles laid out in Chapter 9, the case study results of Chapter 10, and many broader concepts of other chapters. Further patterns crowd the pages of this book. The astute reader will enjoy exploring these foundations and discovering more patterns of the good, the bad, and the interesting. Good patterns

Beneﬁts seem to clearly outweigh shortcomings for the following characteristics, which are grouped in several categories for convenience. Cities listed are illustrative, and more representative or more extreme examples can normally be found in the rich mixture of cities around the globe. Metro area characteristics, city, and urban region Urban-region area correlated rather closely with a province, state, or nation. Berlin, Singapore City relatively close to several major landscape types that provide diverse resources. Abeche, Denver (USA), Kota (India), Kuala Lumpur, Madrid, Rahimyar Khan, San Diego/Tijuana, Santiago, Seville (Spain) City on border of, rather than within, large valuable land-cover types. Beijing, Ottawa, Nairobi, Salt Lake City (USA) City located by storm-protected coastal bay. Bandar Lampung (Indonesia), Boston, Buenos Aires, Edinburgh, Kagoshima, Lagos, Lisbon, San Diego/Tijuana, Seattle (USA), Sydney, Tunis Relatively compact metropolitan area. Bucharest, Birmingham (UK), Christchurch (New Zealand), Edmonton, Manado (Indonesia), Nantes, Santiago, Winnipeg (Canada) Planned city that has retained most key characteristics despite extensive growth. Canberra Numerous small greenspaces in metro area. Atlanta, London, Portland, Philadelphia, Seoul

305

306

Gathering the pieces Greenway network tends to interconnect greenspaces for walkers/wildlife in metro area. Copenhagen, Minneapolis/St. Paul (USA), Ottawa, Toronto Wide green corridor along major river bisecting metro area. Edmonton, Washington Large central greenspace. Berlin, Christchurch (New Zealand), Mexico City, New York, Tokyo (mainly palace grounds) Green roofs noticeably abundant in city. Basel (Switzerland), Zurich, certain German cities. Relatively distinct border between metro area and surrounding countryside. Bucharest, Edmonton, Santiago, Shanghai, Soﬁa, Winnipeg (Canada) Major natural-systems project (large edge park) achieved at one portion of metroarea border. Boston (Frederick Law Olmsted’s Emerald Necklace), Barcelona (Antoni Gaudi’s Parque Guell) Urban-growth boundary that sharply reduces rate of outward urbanization. Portland Scalloped metro area border providing benefits to nearby residents. Bucharest Several green wedges projecting into metro area. Moscow, Brasilia, Buenos Aires, Cairo, Chicago, Jabalpur (India), Melbourne, San Diego/Tijuana, Stockholm A single green wedge projecting into metro area. Birmingham (UK), Soﬁa Especially wide and long green wedge, as a major source of wildlife for city. Portland Greenbelt. London, Ottawa (around half of city) Ring of large parks. Barcelona, Seoul (remnants of a former greenbelt) Nearby mountain/hill slopes facing city mainly protected by forest/woodland. Erzurum, Portland, Sapporo, Ulaanbaatar Towns mostly located near boundary of agricultural and natural areas. Ulaanbaatar, Tegucigalpa, Kuala Lumpur Relatively low abundance or ‘‘density” of built-area borders in urban-region ring around large city. Cairo, Beijing Regional land-use planning evident in the metropolitan area form. Canberra, Brasilia, Rome, Bucharest Regional land-use planning evident in the urban-region ring. Brasilia, Canberra, London, Moscow, Beijing, Berlin

Nature, forest/woodland, and food production Abundance of wooded landscapes in urban region. Berlin, Kagoshima Large forest/woodland patches across region resulting from recent several-decade policy. Moscow, Berlin, Bucharest

Good, bad, and interesting patterns in urban regions Large semi-natural patch adjoining city or metro--area. Barcelona, Brasilia (two, including much wetland), Edinburgh, Mexico City, Nairobi (grassland), Philadelphia, Paris Metro area closely surrounded by forest/woodland and its resources. Anchorage (USA), Iquitos, Samarinda Emerald network relatively well developed, though incomplete. Barcelona, San Diego Abundance of protected sites of biodiversity importance. Chicago, Philadelphia Abundance of sites for one-day recreation or tourism. Barcelona, Chicago, London, Seattle (USA), San Jose (Costa Rica) Some Native Peoples’ lands protected. Edmonton, San Diego/Tijuana, Cairns (Australia) Different farmland-area types provide diversity of food products/socioeconomic values. Barcelona, Rome, Sacramento (USA), Seville (Spain) Relatively large wooded patches within cropland landscapes. Bamako, Moscow, Bucharest Market-gardening areas in proximity to city. Bangkok, Barcelona, Chicago, Kagoshima, London, Nairobi, Portland Agriculture--nature park for market-gardening and aquifer protection next to city. Barcelona Water Drainage area around water supply ≥80 % forest/woodland/natural cover. Boston, Canberra, Iquitos, Ottawa, Portland, Santiago, New York Urban-region rivers and major streams mainly surrounded by natural vegetation cover. Berlin, Erzurum, Iquitos, Samarinda, Ulaanbaatar Large reservoir or lake mainly embedded in metro area. Brasilia, Canberra, Madison (USA) Natural vegetation abundant along the lakeshores present. Berlin, Sapporo, Stockholm Extensive wetlands near metro area. Buenos Aires, Miami, Beira (Mozambique), Brasilia, Oslo Transportation, development, industry, pollution Public-transport commuter rail extending well beyond metro area. Berlin, Chicago, Kagoshima, London, Philadelphia, Rome, Sapporo, Stockholm Bicycle parks and community (allotment) gardens near commuter rail stations to serve city residents. Amsterdam, Utrecht Transit-oriented development along a commuter rail line. San Diego, Sydney

307

308

Gathering the pieces Reticulate rail network across urban region providing for non-radial passenger travel. London Low level of annual vehicle-kilometers (miles)-traveled per person. Berlin, Shanghai, Singapore Traffic-congestion programs in the city to limit air pollution and greenhouse gases. London, Singapore, Rome Main highways often along border of, rather than within, major land-cover types. Sapporo Vegetated overpasses that provide connectivity across highways for wildlife and walkers. Barcelona, Amsterdam (for wildlife) New development in urban-region ring mainly occurring next to existing development. Berlin Only, or last, nuclear-power plant in urban region decommissioned/de-fueled. London, Portland Heavy industry concentrated around a satellite city rather than metro area. Sapporo Heavy industry concentrated near shipping/ferry port outside metro area. Sapporo Major diverse pollution sources mainly on downwind edge of metro area. Edmonton, Chicago, Melbourne Bad patterns

Although some beneﬁts, of course, are present, negatives seem to clearly outweigh positives for the following characteristics. Metro-area characteristics, city, and urban region Urban region split between two nations. San Diego/Tijuana, Strasbourg (France) Urban region split between two states or provinces in a nation. Chicago, Ottawa, Philadelphia, Portland, Washington Megacity with significant urban infrastructure and other problems. Delhi, Mexico City, Sao Paulo City with competitive/combined regional effects due to another nearby major city. Asahikawa (Japan), Philadelphia, Kagoshima, Ottawa Metro area within an agglomeration of separated cities, each with >250 000 people. Amsterdam, Seoul, Tokyo Unusually large metro area relative to population and area of urban region. Atlanta, Chicago, Philadelphia Small urban-region ring to support the city. Chicago, Philadelphia, Kagoshima

Good, bad, and interesting patterns in urban regions Low-population-density metro area associated with sprawl. Atlanta, Chicago, Philadelphia, Toronto Metro area patterns strongly reflecting political division into two parts. Berlin (previous division), Jerusalem, Nicosia (Cyprus) Linear metro area spread along coast. Kagoshima, Miami, Kobe (Japan) Elongated metro area separating nearby wooded landscapes. Brasilia, Berlin, Oslo, Ljubljana Rather limited greenspace in metro area relative to population. Barcelona, Bucharest, Erzurum, Mexico City, Santiago Diffuse metro area border area with built areas gradually decreasing outward. Baltimore (USA), Denver (USA), Milan, San Jose (Costa Rica), Valladolid (Spain), Yerevan (Armenia) Creeping development threatening large forest/woodland patch adjacent to metro area. Barcelona, Mexico City Abundance or ‘‘high density” of built-area borders in urban region. Chicago, Philadelphia Nature, forest/woodland, and food production Little forest/woodland remaining in urban region. Bangkok, Bucharest, Chicago, Copenhagen, London, Minneapolis/St. Paul (USA), Nantes Primary old-growth forest in urban region being rapidly logged. Iquitos, Manaus (Brazil), Samarinda Few natural beaches/dunes, vegetation areas, or wetlands remaining along coast. Barcelona, San Diego/Tijuana, Brisbane (Australia), Miami Recreation and tourism sites mainly at some distance from city. Cuttack Limited cropland area producing food in urban region. Abeche, Brasilia, Canberra, Erzurum, Phoenix (USA), Omsk (Russia) Only one or two main farmland-area type, providing little diversity in food products. Atlanta, Chicago, Edmonton, Erzurum, London, Xi’an (China) Cropland more concentrated near metro-area border than across the urban-region ring. Cairo, Rahimyar Khan, Edmonton, Erzurum, Santiago, Portland Outward urbanization removing scarce cropland area. Cairo, Philadelphia Water Drainage basin for water supply with significant area outside urban region. Philadelphia, San Diego/Tijuana (much water piped from Northern California and Colorado River), Sydney

309

310

Gathering the pieces Drainage basin for water supply mainly covered by intensive cropland. Kagoshima, London, Mexico City Water-supply drainage basin close to metro area. Abeche, Bamako, Kagoshima, Seoul, Tegucigalpa Main reservoir for water supply, recreation, and aesthetics polluted. Beijing (one of two), Brasilia (replaced by small distant reservoirs) Water supply mainly from streams subject to drought and human impacts. Tegucigalpa Water supply from groundwater wells subject to pollution and drought. Abeche, Bamako Best aquifer in relatively dry region threatened by development. Barcelona Water table dropped and water bodies dried out in central portion of region. Mexico City Wetlands (subject to drought) providing major water source for irrigation system. Bangkok Few rivers/major streams still surrounded by natural vegetation cover. Atlanta, Bucharest, Cairo, Chicago, Cuttack, Edmonton, Kagoshima, Mexico City, Rome, Sapporo Main rivers/streams usually reduced to low flow or trickle. Barcelona, El Paso (USA), Mexico City Lakes mainly ringed by cropland, and exhibiting sedimentation/water quality problems. Rome, Minneapolis/St. Paul (USA), Chicago No major surface water body near city. Abeche, Beijing, Houston (USA), Johannesburg, Madrid, Mexico City, Milan, Nairobi

Transportation, development, industry, pollution Large number of major radial highways, all reaching urban region boundary. Atlanta, London, Moscow Ring highway mainly outside metro area, with extensive development beyond. Bangkok, Beijing (concentric ring roads), Boston, Mexico City, Milan, Rome, San Antonio (USA) Two-lane ring road likely to be widened and catalyze widespread development. Bucharest, Moscow Main roads and bridges periodically impassable due to flooding. Abeche, Cuttack, Rahimyar Khan Limited main-road access between metro area and much of region. Abeche, Cuttack, Erzurum High level of annual vehicle-kilometers (miles) traveled per person. Atlanta Shipping/ferry port located far from city center. Bangkok, Cairo, Santiago

Good, bad, and interesting patterns in urban regions Built areas surround many streams and rivers. San Diego/Tijuana, Philadelphia, Chicago High edge density (border length) of built areas in urban-region ring. Barcelona, Chicago, London, Moscow, Philadelphia Towns and small cities in large areas of region threatening to coalesce by urbanization. Barcelona, Raleigh/Durham (USA), Toronto Dispersed-site development the predominant model of urbanization. Atlanta, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Diego/Tijuana Slopes near metro area much covered by built area. Brasilia, Beijing Considerable squatter housing/shantytown areas. Brasilia, Rio de Janeiro, Lagos, Johannesburg, Jakarta, Kolkata (Calcutta) Heavy industry concentration close to city. Beijing, Edmonton, Kagoshima, Seoul Severe air pollution over metro area. Beijing, Buenos Aires, Cairo, Caracas, Delhi, Jakarta, Mexico City, Shenyang (China), Los Angeles Extensive coastal near-shore water pollution. Bangkok, Barcelona, Buenos Aires, Marseilles Rivers/streams extensively polluted by sewage, industry, and agriculture. Barcelona, Rome, Seoul, Tegucigalpa, Guangzhou (China) Large mine-waste areas in urban region. Berlin, Johannesburg, Miami, Prague

Hazards Riverside city subject to serious flood hazard. Bangkok, Cincinnati (USA), Jakarta, Iquitos, Santiago, Ulaanbaatar, Winnipeg (Canada) On multi-channel river delta with extensive flooding. Cuttack, Dhaka, Ho Chi Minh, Lagos, New Orleans (USA), Rangoon, Rotterdam, Shanghai, St. Petersburg, Vancouver Significant hazard from hurricane/cyclone. Havana, Miami, Osaka, Taipei Significant hazard from coastal flooding. Bangkok, Manila, Mumbai (Bombay) Significant area subject to inundation by sea-level rise. Amsterdam, Bangkok, Buenos Aires, Kolkata (Calcutta), Dakha, London, New Orleans (USA), New York Significant earthquake-hazard area. Managua (Nicaragua), Kobe (Japan), Mexico City, San Francisco Hill/mountain slopes widely cultivated, with erosion/sedimentation/flooding problems. Rome, Port-au-Prince (Haiti), Tegucigalpa

311

312

Gathering the pieces Threat of landslides. Ankara, Caracas, Hong Kong, San Salvador (El Salvador) Uncertainty near major migrating river and moving desert dunes. Rahimyar Khan Built areas close to frequent woodland fires. Barcelona, Canberra, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, San Diego/Tijuana, Montpelier (France) Active nuclear-power facility in urban region. Kiev Metro area close to military concentrations and demilitarized zone. Seoul Interesting patterns

Many of these are relatively uncommon land-use patterns, where the balance between pros and cons seems somewhat equal, or more study is warranted. Metro-area characteristics, city, and urban region Two major cities nearby but separate. Glasgow and Edinburgh, Baltimore and Washington A single government for essentially the whole urban region. Beijing, Brisbane (Australia) Metro-area population more than twice the city population. Lagos, Los Angeles, Lyon (France), New York, Cincinnati (USA), Seoul, Tokyo Megacity with somewhat manageable urban problems. London, Moscow, New York, Tokyo Metro area in part a product of recent wars and a several-decade partition. Berlin Relatively distinct semi-circular metro area. Manado (Indonesia), Toronto Metro area with unusually long and convoluted border. Chicago, Atlanta, Philadelphia Several built-area lobes on perimeter of metro area. Moscow, Stockholm, Santiago, Kuala Lumpur No major greenspace wedges on metro-area perimeter. London, Barcelona, Mexico City, Beijing, Samarinda Several unique/distinctive natural-systems-related features dose to metro-area border. Brasilia, Barcelona, Portland, London Planned city seemingly ‘‘overrun” by extensive urban growth. Brasilia, Chandigarth (India), Curritiba (Brazil), Washington Major sections of city somewhat separated by elongated greenspaces. Asahikawa (Japan), Brasilia (sections with distinctive shapes), Canberra, Harare (Zimbabwe), Johannesburg

Good, bad, and interesting patterns in urban regions Abundance of small, linear greenspaces in metro area. San Diego/Tijuana, Brasilia, Bamako, Seoul Long narrow metro area. Miami, Piura (Peru), Ulaanbaatar Regularly distributed villages over much of region. Bahawalpur (Pakistan), Xi’an (China) Total built-area border length in urban region largely due to towns. Barcelona, Abeche, Erzurum, Rahimyar Khan Considerable built-area border length in urban region due to satellite cities. San Diego/Tijuana, Bucharest Only one satellite city, or none, in urban region. Abeche, Edmonton, Erzurum, Iquitos Satellite cities mainly in inner urban-region ring. Seoul, Barcelona, Bangkok, Berlin, Kuala Lumpur, London Satellite cities mainly in outer urban-region ring. Bucharest, Mexico City, Rome Parallel ridges and valleys with streams slicing through metro area. Birmingham (USA) Most of metro area with a fairly regular grid of streets/roads. Beijing, Minneapolis/St. Paul (USA), San Antonio (USA), Xi’an (China), Toronto Ring of regional shopping malls distributed near metro-area border. Boston

Nature, forest/woodland, food production, and water Only large forest/woodland area in region largely protected for recreation/biodiversity. Edmonton Many gaps and narrow connections present between natural landscapes. Berlin, Kagoshima, Sapporo Large wildlife park next to city providing greenspace and recreation/tourism values. Nairobi Very little forest/woodland present mainly due to grassland or desert climate. Abeche, Buenos Aires, Amarillo (USA), Erzurum, Jodhpur (India), Tehran Wooded area present is concentrated near metro-area border. Barcelona Region with prominent large agricultural fields resulting from recent severaldecade policy. Berlin, Bucharest, Moscow Nearest cropland landscapes far from city center. Nairobi, Abeche Agricultural land overwhelmingly surrounds streams and rivers. Sapporo, Bucharest, Mexico City, Cairo, Edmonton Distant water supply. Nairobi, Santiago Water supply depending on a canal(s). Berlin, Moscow

313

314

Gathering the pieces Extensive canal irrigation system. Bangkok, Cairo, Fresno (USA) Aquaculture areas in proximity, as source of food and water pollution. Bangkok City located on coast without a major bay or natural harbor. Barcelona, Chicago, Toronto, Algiers Transportation, industry, and pollution Large number of major airports in urban region. London, Moscow, San Diego/Tijuana Nearest major airport relatively far from city center. Stockholm, Kagoshima, Cuttack, Milan Access to outside world limited to air or boat travel. Iquitos Several prominent concentric ring highways. Beijing Commuter rail system essentially restricted to metro area. Beijing, Cairo, Portland, Edmonton Shipping/ferry port for nearby offshore oil field. Samarinda, New Orleans (USA), Maracaibo (Venezuela) This array of good, bad, and interesting patterns for urban region ecology and planning is, of course, incomplete. No summary is perfect or complete, and each reader is likely to note controversial items. A perusal of the ﬁgures through this book underlies how many more patterns could be added. Nevertheless, what can be done with such highlighted patterns? Put them right to work improving urban regions. Two points are important. First, the patterns do not point to a single big best solution for shaping cities or urban regions. No magic solution or cookie-cutter approach exists. Who would want to visit Europe or Asia and ﬁnd cities all look similar or the same? Putting principles to work helps avoid pitfalls, but most importantly creates solid foundations. From these, distinctiveness and glory can evolve and persevere. Second how do we proceed? In simplest terms for a particular city, sort through the good and bad patterns and select a good batch. Perhaps evaluate different combinations, gradually discarding the least useful items. The enjoyable weaving process begins when a few of the collected patterns mesh nicely with the existing mosaic in the urban region of interest. Try roughly outlining, or sketching, or model-building the evolving mosaic, as items are continually added and discarded. Keep the changing outlines to marvel at the progress. The resulting tapestry should certainly transcend today’s urban region. The Barcelona Region plan (Chapter 10) emerged from a primitive version of this process.

12

Big pictures

If I lived in a romantic castle atop a mountain, periodically I would charge around ﬂinging open windows to let in light and air, and to gain inspiration from the glorious views around. This book is the castle. It is time to open those windows [ten of them today] and see our subject in broader challenging, delightfully diverse perspectives. These big-picture frameworks for urban regions and natural systems are presented in three heterogeneous groups, though each of the ten broad perspectives stands on its own. (1)

(2) (3)

The ﬁrst group of big pictures, Garden-to-gaia; Urban sustainability; Disasters, highlights our major spatial arrangements with nature, plus the periodic disruptions. The second group, Climate change; Species extinction; Water scarcity, represents the gathering giant environmental challenges. The third group, Big-ideas--regulations--treaties--policy--governance; Megacities; Sense of place, brings strong social and cultural connections to the forefront.

The ﬁnal section, Awakening to the urban tsunami, attempts to identify the giants lying just over the horizon, and discover the best route ahead for us and for the land.

Garden-to-gaia, urban sustainability, disasters These three challenging perspectives highlight the roles of spatial scale and critical linkages across the land in developing solutions for urban regions.

315

316

Big pictures The third topic, the dreaded overnight catastrophe of particular importance to urban regions, pinpoints disruptive forces that must be accounted for in societal solutions. Garden to gaia

Most of us can relate to a tiny garden at home, digging, planting, weeding, watching, harvesting, and eating with special pleasure. Satellite images of progressively larger areas -- a house (p)lot, meadow or woodlot, neighborhood, locality/town, broad landscape, region, continent, and globe -- almost always have a relatively extensive green background. In effect these areas, widely differing in spatial scale, are all productive gardens, with soil, plants, animals, water, and usually people (Lovelock 2000). Which of these scales do we care most about? Typically loyalty to family is central, and one’s commitment progressively decreases from neighborhood to town/city, state, nation, and globe. Although worldwide newscasts, economic globalization, and climate change force us to think globally, hardly anyone has a major allegiance to the planet. Suppose one wished to improve the world in some way that is both visible and perseveres (e.g., to avoid having lived unnoticed or unrecorded by history). What scale would be optimal? Certainly one could have a visible effect on a tiny home garden, but there is almost no chance that the spot would remain in similar form over, say, decades or human generations. (Alternatively, hardly anyone can affect the whole globe as did, for example, Genghis Khan and Christopher Columbus.) Yet, considering the long history of predicted armageddons that never occurred, the globe is likely to muddle along in somewhat similar form for eons. The ‘‘paradox of management” oft-faced by industry reﬂects this quandary (Forman 1995). Small spaces are easily changed, but inherently unstable. Large spaces are hard to change, yet have considerable stability. The best solution seems to focus on mid-size spaces, such as landscapes and regions. At these scales one’s improvement efforts may address both sides of the paradox, achieving an effect that is clearly visible in the short term and perseveres for the long term. For example, an agricultural or large-wetland landscape, or even a region of landscapes, such as New England (USA), Southern Sweden, or Central America, is a promising target for such dual success. Landscapes and regions are simply big gardens to be invested in and cared for. This logic suggests that in urban regions the central business district is too small for a sustainability focus. The city is a possibility because it has a single government that can address multiple-sector issues (White 2002). Yet today’s city is normally buried in and inseparable from its metropolitan area. The metro area is a distinctive visual unit (see Color Figures 2--39), but as repeatedly seen

Garden-to-gaia, urban sustainability, disasters in previous chapters, is expanding outward and is thoroughly affected by in-andout interactions with its surroundings. The metro area fundamentally depends on its urban-region ring for water, recreation/tourism, mineral resources, and much more. Within an urban region, farmland and forest landscapes tend to be peppered with towns and small cities, most growing, which obliterate much of the previous distinctiveness and integrity that the landscapes may have had. Consequently, planning at the level of the urban region itself appears to be the optimum solution to the basic question or quandary of where best to focus efforts for an effective mesh of nature and people in and around cities. This fundamental point ﬁts nicely in my bumper sticker (Forman 1995): ‘‘Think Globally, Plan Regionally, and Then Act Locally.” Keep the globe in mind when making daily decisions. But most importantly, create a plan for every landscape and every region that provides sustainably for nature and people. Then with the broad plan in hand, make the important local changes and reﬁnements that ﬁt effectively into the big picture. Urban sustainability

Many scholars have noted that the term urban sustainability is essentially an oxymoron. It is extremely difﬁcult to envision a city with thousands or millions of people packed together that provides a thriving balance for both people and nature. One might consider urban sustainability an idealistic goal or endpoint which we seek, but never reach. Or, since the basic concept, like trying to nail applesauce to a tree, seems vague and hard to pin down, everyone tends to deﬁne it to suit a particular purpose. I essentially avoid the term urban sustainability, but recognize that useful ways to think about it might be developed (Braat and Steetskamp 1991, Forman 1999, Forman 2002a, Berkowitz et al. 2003, Blowers 2003, Pezzey 2004, Rogers 2006, Moore 2007, Wu 2007). Here are three approaches, with the last one offering the most promise. The ﬁrst builds on the idea that a multitude of tiny fine-scale solutions, when added together, make a difference for a whole city or metropolitan area. These tiny solutions could be of a single type multiplied together many-fold, or of an array of types with potential synergies. Energy-efﬁcient building materials, use of public transport, recycling of wastes, water conservation techniques, and food-growing on balconies and window boxes in the city are commonly cited examples. One could add ‘‘biophilic design” of buildings with green roofs (Stuttgart, Germany; Basel and Zurich, Switzerland) and a profusion of plants inside (Kellert and Wilson 1993, Peck and Kuhn 2003, English Nature 2003, Dunnett and Kingsbury 2004, Brenneisen 2006). City streets could be rife with storm-water swales, porous pavement, rich biodiversity, and aesthetic design (Beatley 2000, France 2002, Brandt et al. 2003, Hough 2004). Even at a somewhat broader scale, a city could

317

318

Big pictures be densely peppered with parks and greenspace corridors (Jacobs 1961, Cityspace 1998), so non-urban species can move relatively unimpeded throughout the city (Chapter 4). A massive implementation of one of these ﬁne-scale solutions, or several examples of all the types, could create a city where the packed people daily encounter and are attuned to the environment. Still, it would be an anthropocentric result. Only shreds of nature could thrive long term. Perhaps only a massive implementation of all the ﬁne-scale solutions, admittedly an idealistic goal, could ﬁt the test of urban sustainability. A second sustainability concept takes a systems view of the city, somewhat analogous to ‘‘urban metabolism” (Sukopp and Werner 1983, Haber 1993, Tjallingii 1995, Ravetz 2000, Grimm et al. 2003). Consider a city as a huge box bulging with people, and in which some products are manufactured and traces of food grown. If all the holes in the box are blocked up, the people die, because the internal production is totally inadequate to sustain the population. Also very little has been stored in the city to handle such a crisis as plugged-up holes. Normally the holes of the box are open so huge amounts of things, from food to water, building materials, vehicles, and people, enter. And immense amounts leave, including garbage, pollutants, vehicles, and people. The city, as part of a larger system, is a box with inputs and outputs. The functioning of Hong Kong, in 1971 a coastal city with four million residents (Boyden et al. 1981, McNeill 2000), is a vivid example. Its daily atmospheric inﬂows and outﬂows (in thousands of tons) were: oxygen 27 and 0, respectively; carbon dioxide 0 and 26.5; carbon monoxide 0 and 0.16; sulfur oxides 0 and 0.31; nitrogen oxides 0 and 0.12; and dust 0 and 0.04. The city’s in-and-out water ﬂows were: freshwater 1068 and 819; sewage water 0 and 819; and solids in sewage 0 and 6.3. Other major inputs and outputs included: petroleum 11.7 and 0; food 6.3 and 0; food waste 0 and 0.8; miscellaneous cargo 18 and 8.1; and people 0.53 and 0.52. The city was a giant sponge, every day absorbing tons of freshwater, petroleum, food, and cargo goods. And every day it sent tons of pollutants, sewage, and diverse materials mainly to surrounding areas. The larger the inputs and outputs relative to production and storage within the box, the less stable or sustainable a city is (Tjallingii 1995, Forman 1995). A truckers’ or garbage-removal-workers’ strike, or a major breakdown of the watersupply or sewage-treatment system, causes enormous disruption. All of these have happened in various cities to the dismay of residents and policymakers alike. Nevertheless, in addition to reducing population, each of the basic components of the city system can be improved. Stability or sustainability can be enhanced by: (1) decreasing consumption by people within the city; (2) increasing production in the city; (3) increasing storage in the city; (4) decreasing inputs to the city; and (5) decreasing outputs from the city.

Garden-to-gaia, urban sustainability, disasters A third approach for urban sustainability highlights a city’s ‘‘prime footprints” or imprint areas, and may be the only case where sustainability has a reasonable chance of attainment. First, identify the primary landscapes or sites that provide most of the inputs to a city. These might include water supply from a forested drainage basin in the urban region, key mining and industrialproduction sites, a grain-production landscape, a pastureland area, a region exporting tropical fruits, and a market-gardening area near the city. Similarly, identify the areas receiving most of the outputs, i.e., the major solid-waste site, air-pollutant deposit areas, nearby recreation/tourism sites, and so forth. The prime-footprints model or concept, in other words, refers to the primary source-and-sink areas connected to a city or urban region by routes of inputs and outputs. Establishing and maintaining a balance, where nature and people thrive in the prime-footprints system as a whole, would achieve urban sustainability for the city, even though in isolation the city supports only shreds of nature. In addition, decreasing the number of input-and-output routes, shortening the routes, and reducing the input-and-output amounts would all be steps toward sustainability. Ecological footprint analysis (Chapter 3) (Wackernagel and Rees 1996, Costanza 2000, Rees 2003) is an important preliminary step in this direction. It identiﬁes the total equivalent area used to support the people in a city. The prime footprints approach takes the next big steps by highlighting the speciﬁc footprint locations, the amounts and routes of inputs and outputs linking key locations to the urban region, and the importance of planning each footprint and the urban region together as an integrated system. In short, plan each of the prime-footprint areas linked to the city, plus the city, so the set as a whole sustains a suitable nature-and-people balance. Disasters

The ‘‘ten bad ones” -- wildﬁre, volcanic eruption, earthquake, tsunami, ﬂood, hurricane (cyclone/typhoon), industrial-pollutant release, nuclear-powerplant radiation release, bombing, and disease outbreak -- are particularly serious in urban regions where people and human structures are so concentrated. Landslides/avalanches, economic depressions, radical strong-government transformations, wars/conﬂicts, and massive immigrant arrivals (e.g., war or environmental refugees) could be added to the list. Nevertheless, we begin with characteristics common to disasters in urban regions, then sequentially glimpse each of the ten disaster types, and end with some guidelines targeted to urban regions. Disasters are sudden events causing great loss or damage. Humans are impacted, often for a prolonged period, through property damage, illness, and death (Kreimer et al. 2003). Disrupted infrastructure networks -- gas pipelines,

319

320

Big pictures oil pipelines, powerlines, telephone lines, water pipelines, sewer lines, railroads, and roads/highways -- particularly cause effects to ramify across a region. Clean water supply as a daily human need is especially signiﬁcant after a disaster. Sometimes effects on natural systems are more severe, such as radioactivity in soil and water around Chernobyl and Kiev which will degrade nature for eons. Ecosystem services (Chapter 4) to the region’s people are reduced. The degree of loss or damage from a disaster also depends on preceding human activities and land uses. A massive 2005 New Orleans (USA) ﬂood, which was triggered by a hurricane, mainly resulted from broken levees constructed to raise a huge adjoining lake level 5 m above major portions of the city (Costanza et al. 2006). So now let us turn to the ten bad disasters. Wildfire If you enter an area where almost every plant has ﬁre adaptations, e.g., rapid multi-stem resprouting, the landscape has a long history of frequent ﬁre. If you see a few buildings and it’s warm or windy, watch out. Attempts to stop the history have created a large fuel buildup ripe for an abnormally big ﬁre. So it is with the Pine Barrens by the Philadelphia metro area, eucalypt forest around Canberra, chaparral engulﬁng San Diego and Los Angeles, and oakland by Barcelona and the Mediterranean. A 2003 wildﬁre eliminating koala, emu, and other wildlife swept into Canberra’s green wedge and compact neighborhoods. In both 2003 and 2007, wildﬁre wiped out >2000 homes where sprawl had encroached on the ﬁre landscape around San Diego. Volcanic eruption Lava ﬂows, massive mud or debris ﬂows, landslides, dense particulate air pollution that coats the lungs, and longer-term deposits of volcanic ash are the culprits. The Italian city of Pompeii was covered by an eruption of Mount Vesuvius so quickly that archaeologists centuries later felt they were looking at a moment in daily life frozen in time. In 1985 Pereira (Colombia) was devastated by a mud ﬂow from a volcanically melted alpine glacier. Earthquake Consider some urban disasters: 526 Antioch (Syria, now Turkey); 1703 Tokyo; 1755 Lisbon; 1812 Caracas; 1905 Kangra (India); 1906 San Francisco; 1908 Messina (Italy); 1923 Kanto (Japan); 1939 Erzincan (Turkey); 1948 Ashgabat (Turkmenistan); 1964 Anchorage (USA); 1976 Guatemala City; 1976 Tangshan (China); 1985 Mexico City; 1995 Kobe (Japan); 2003 Bam (Iran). Rolling waves or surface ruptures with lateral or upward/downward movements last for seconds

Garden-to-gaia, urban sustainability, disasters or minutes. Utility lines rupture, houses fall, mid-rise buildings collapse, highways give way, buildings sink, ﬁres break out, and landslides occur. Damage from San Francisco’s earthquake was mainly because the water pipes broke and a huge ﬁre swept across the city. The long narrow city of Kobe was Japan’s busiest seaport and one of Asia’s top ports. Its earthquake killed 6400 people outright, left 300 000 homeless, crumbled downtown skyscrapers, toppled elevated highways, and destroyed large parts of the port and city. A 2006 National Geographic world map suggests that a third of the 38 cities analyzed lies in an earthquake ‘‘high risk” zone. Overall the two primary strategies in earthquake hazard reduction are: (1) identifying areas of high seismic risk, and (2) designing structures to withstand shaking. Progress in both of these has occurred in a few countries. Tsunami Earthquakes, as well as underwater volcanic eruptions and landslides, often trigger seismic waves or tsunamis that race across the ocean at some 500 km/hr (300 mi/hr). Upon reaching shallow water by coastlines, the powerful waves swell to great heights and rush inland threatening coastal cities. In 365 AD an earthquake leveled one of the world’s ‘‘wonders,” the Pharos (Lighthouse) of Alexandria (Egypt), and sent a tsunami across the Eastern Mediterranean. Maintaining protective coastal wetlands (Farber 1987, Danielsen et al. 2005) and mainly building at higher elevations are key coastal guards against tsunami damage. Flood In addition to tsumanis, four types of ﬂooding devastate cities. The New Orleans case introduced above had a perched lake/reservoir at a higher elevation, so the city was ﬂooded when the levee/dam broke (Costanza et al. 2006). Second, cities alongside rivers or on river deltas are inundated by water from upriver (Figure 12.1). Deforestation or development on hill slopes and mountain slopes removes the absorptive capacity of natural vegetation, and accelerates waterﬂows over the land surface into streams and rivers (Chapter 4) (Jared 2004). More water arrives faster, causing a higher peak ﬂow or ﬂood. Third, a coastal city is subject to ﬂooding, especially during high tides, when huge windstorms push seawater toward a coastline, effectively raising the water level and inundating onshore areas. The fourth case is a riverside city a short distance inland from the coast, where the severe onshore windstorm pushes water right up the river to inundate the city. Thus Bangkok (Color Figure 5) gets ﬂooded by water from both directions, approaching from upriver and approaching from the coast downriver. Cities partly built on low areas (Amsterdam, Cairo, Dhaka) of course are especially subject to ﬂoods.

321

322

Big pictures

Figure 12.1 Flood caused by extensive loss of natural vegetation. Without nature’s absorptive capacity, water from a 30 cm (1 ft) rainstorm on relatively ﬂat clayey soil readily ﬂowed to, and accumulated in, extensive low areas. Texas. Photo courtesy of USDA-Soil Conservation Service.

Hurricane (cyclone or typhoon) This strong large-diameter rotating wind, commonly strengthening as it moves over warm seawater, is especially dangerous to coastal cities, though inland cities are also damaged. Devastating cyclones hit Hong Kong in 1937 and Dhaka (Bangladesh) in 1942, 1961, 1963, 1965, 1970, and 1991. High winds of course cause lots of property damage. If the hurricane is moving slowly, often heavy rain precedes and follows the eye of the storm. Thus ﬂoods are common, and saturated earth contributes to extensive tree blowdowns. A 1938 hurricane in Central Massachusetts (USA) caused the most tree damage on the southeast slopes and tops of hills, and on the northwest ends of large openings such as ponds and meadows (Foster and Boose 1992). These sites appear to have had the highest wind velocities, probably just after the hurricane’s eye had passed. The New Orleans hurricane passed over an extensive area where wetland marshes had been eliminated (Farber 1987). Yet one estimate suggests that the storm

Garden-to-gaia, urban sustainability, disasters surge could have been reduced 4.7 cm for each kilometer of marsh in front of the city, due to the presence of both vegetation and shallow water (Farber 1987, Danielsen et al. 2005, Costanza et al. 2006). A 6 km wide protective marsh would have dropped the approaching seawater by 30 cm (a foot). Industrial air pollution The sudden release of toxic substances into the city air by industries has been a chronic problem, though periodically the type and amount of pollutant is considered a disaster (e.g., in Mexico City, Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur). Industries tend to aggregate close to cities where workers live. The effects on human health and on the survival of wildlife populations in the urban region of course depend on the substance emitted. As perhaps the worst case, in 1984 a pesticide-producing industry in the heart of Bhopal (India), a city of 1.5 million, released 40 tons of a toxic gas (methyl isocyanate or MIC), which is heavier than air. Some 3000 people are reported to have died quickly, perhaps another 15 000 over the following two decades, and the total continues to climb. Reports suggest that a third of the city’s population was exposed to the chemicals and a signiﬁcant portion had related health problems. Contamination is apparently still present at the factory site and its dumping grounds, as well as in drinking water. Incentives for heavy industries to relocate away from water bodies and dense human populations, to heavy-industry centers with efﬁcient energy, water, and waste disposal (Chapter 10), should pay manifold dividends. Radiation releases from nuclear power plants The 38 urban regions analyzed are in 32 nations worldwide, over half of which have operating nuclear-power reactors (John P. Holdren, personal communication). Most are in France, Japan, USA, United Kingdom, and Russia. Releases of radioactivity into the air and water apparently are not infrequent, and no safe level or threshold exists. Because the radioactivity often accumulates through the food chain, insect-eaters and meat-eaters are generally most affected. The radioactivity is incorporated into tissue and damages proteins and DNA, which leads to radiation disease and death. Altered DNA can be passed to future generations with consequent genetic and health problems. Occasionally large releases of radiation have occurred, such as at Windscale (United Kingdom) in 1957 and Three-Mile-Island well west of Philadelphia in 1979. A massive 1986 release at Chernobyl near the small city of Prypyat and 130 km north of Kiev (USSR, now Ukraine) resulted in elevated rates of many illnesses, especially cancer, that continue to appear two decades later. A 27 km radius (17 mile) ‘‘exclusion zone” exists (including the former city of Prypyat) where radioactivity levels are high and access is highly restricted; three other nuclear reactors still operate there.

323

324

Big pictures Much of the debris from the exploded power plant was buried nearby, especially in a ﬂoodplain where groundwater is now contaminated. Strontium, cesium, and heavy plutonium fell on agricultural land. Radioactive soil later blew over extensive areas including Kiev, where radioactivity threatens children, adults, and wildlife (Henry A. Nix and David Hulse, personal communications). Chernobyl is humanity’s most indelible big stain on Earth -- a 25 000 year legacy. Bombing Bombs dropped from aircraft have been used to destroy major portions of cities, such as London in 1942, Cologne (Germany) in 1942, and Hanoi in the 1960s. Resulting ﬁres caused considerable damage as well. Atomic bombs destroyed much of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Japan) in 1945, and residual radiation caused illness and death for decades thereafter. The 2001 destruction of the World Trade Center by plane crashes killed about 3000 people at one spot in New York, yet the resulting clouds of pollutants spread widely causing illness and temporary physical damage across the city. Disease outbreak The fourteenth century Black Death or Plague spread rapidly through Medieval Europe, often cutting a city’s population by a third or half. Rats and ﬂeas and people were packed together in walled cities so transmission of the bacterial disease was rapid. The 1917--18 inﬂuenza virus pandemic killed millions in cities worldwide. With half the world’s population urban today, and perhaps three-quarters a generation from now, disease outbreaks that easily outrace medical research may be disasters just ahead. What can be done in urban regions in the face of the ‘‘ten bad ones”? First, try drawing a large donut on a piece of paper, with one edge of the donut somewhat ﬂattened, and a line perpendicular to the ﬂattened edge that cuts the donut in half (Chapter 11). The donut’s hole represents a metropolitan area, the yummy part is the urban-region ring, the ﬂattened side a seacoast, and the line a major river bisecting the metro area. Now draw arrows for the major directional flows: prevailing entering wind; river water entering from higher land; tsunami from the sea; hurricane/cyclone; water pushed upriver by the hurricane; and any others. The goal is to identify and map the areas in the urban region that are particularly susceptible to disasters, and areas that are not. For example, radiation release on the upwind side of the donut’s hole spreads over the city, whereas air pollution from an industry on the downwind side is less likely a problem. Perhaps place red checkers or marks on the areas most susceptible to disasters, and black checkers on the best places for locating key structures. In effect, directional ﬂows across the urban region are a key to hazard reduction.

Climate change, species extinction, water scarcity The checkered donut could get more interesting and useful by adding other sorts of sites or areas in different colors. What and where are the items, such as the perched lake next to New Orleans or perhaps a nuclear power plant, which normally should be avoided in an urban region under any circumstances? Where are all the low areas subject to ﬂooding, where wetlands may be useful to provide valuable ecosystem services? Where are the strongest winds expected in a hurricane? Where could protective wetlands be established against coastal storm surges? Where could self-building sand dunes be maintained to protect against storm effects? Where are the dangerous speciﬁc earthquake-fault-lines, such as between hard and soft rock material? By now the donut looks complex, yet also some disaster-prone areas and other relatively unsusceptible areas should be evident. Finally, for the disaster-reduction solution, add some risk-avoidance techniques from industry, game theory, or military strategy. For example, add redundancy or ‘‘don’t put all eggs in one basket.” The biggest gain in risk avoidance is going from one to two valuable objects, some beneﬁt results from increasing to three, and very little is gained after ﬁve. Or, diversify so that instead of having three objects of the same type, have three different objects. Or, increasing the size of an operation decreases the per-unit product cost up to a point, but when the operation begins to get too big, decentralize. Or, increase the connections among objects so that if one object or one connection fails, the system is likely to keep going. Or, increase the number of loops or circuits in the system to provide more alternative pathways. The list of potential disaster-reduction techniques goes on. Some of these are useful in dealing with the sudden event, while others provide resilience so the damage afterward is minimized. That combination should be particularly useful for disasters such as earthquakes, bombing, and volcanic eruption (Kreimer et al. 2003). The donut map must be pretty interesting if all these dimensions for disaster reduction have been incorporated. Apocalypse and Armaggedon do not seem inevitable; the planned urban-region donut provides areas for optimism. Climate change, species extinction, water scarcity These three big pictures highlight the gathering giant environmental challenges before us. Under the hand of these forces the land and water we depend on are changing, ever more rapidly, as in the upward-turning portion of an exponential curve. Climate change

Global climate change and its effects, especially associated with human activities, are the subject of daily news headlines and numerous treatises. Here the effects on and effects of climate change are brieﬂy mentioned, but mainly we

325

326

Big pictures explore some promising responses for urban regions and their natural systems to the varied climate-change effects expected. Vehicle usage, industry, and heating/cooling of buildings, as prime sources of CO2 and other greenhouse gases that lead to human-caused climate change, are concentrated in cities. London and Singapore have some controls on vehicle usage. Thus solutions must focus on cities to cut down the giant-chimney-like upward rushing CO2 ﬂows. Certain German and Swiss cities are seriously investing in green buildings (Spivey 2002, Dunnett and Kingsbury 2004, Brenneisen 2006). Urban agriculture is growing worldwide (Smit 2006). These are exceptions, but at the same time possible prototypes. Addressing the much-documented heat island effect (von Stulpnagel et al. 1990, Arnﬁeld 2003), which worsens with both urbanization and global warming, is particularly relevant now and long overdue. Certainly many investments and actions by governments, organizations, and individuals that decrease urban greenhouse-gas sources are warranted to reduce the proliferating effects of climate change (Gore 2006). Three broad effects of anthropogenic climate change on urban regions are (McCarthy et al. 2001, Houghton et al. 2001, Climate Change Impacts on the United States 2001, IPCC draft summary for Policymakers 2007): (1) temperature increase, (2) sea-level rise, and (3) extreme weather events. For simplicity, precipitation is included with the ﬁrst and third effects. Typical effects will be outlined, though of course variations exist for cities in every corner of the world. The temperature increase expected is, in general, a few degrees Celsius (several degrees Fahrenheit) over a few decades. What does that mean, for instance, to the now-familiar city and region of Barcelona (Chapter 10) (Forman 2004a)? Average annual temperature is likely to rise about 2 ◦ C (4.5 ◦ F) by the 2020s, and 3 ◦ C by the 2050s. Temperature increases in summer months will be even higher. Average annual precipitation is likely to decrease about 10--15 % by the 2020s, and 20 % by the 2050s. An increased frequency and intensity of summer heat waves, increase in summer drought risk, and greater frequency of intense precipitation events are likely. Does that really matter to people, or to the land? Yes. These climatic changes would signiﬁcantly squeeze the already limited water-supply system, parch the soil of the economically and culturally important wine-growing area, scorch the already-hot summer tourism season causing manifold problems for hotels, restaurants, and local economies, and produce debilitatingly hot summer conditions for all of Barcelona’s residents. Indeed these effects appear to be imminent. Temperature increase typically increases evapo-transpiration which dries the soil and desiccates plants. In built areas, that leaves less shade and less evaporative cooling, i.e., a hotter city. A massive increase in green roofs and other biophilic design solutions using drought tolerant plants could reduce the problem,

Climate change, species extinction, water scarcity

Figure 12.2 Koala, a rare species feeding on eucalypt (gum tree) leaves that is threatened by urbanization and climate warming. The much beloved animals are subject to dog, fox, and other predators on the ground, and thus have difﬁculty moving between habitat patches in urban regions. Gary M. Stolz photo courtesy of US Fish and Wildlife Service.

at the same time providing ﬂooding and biodiversity beneﬁts (Kellert and Wilson 1993, Peck and Kuhn 2003, Hien et al. 2007). Analogously, an extensive transformation of streetscapes using stormwater swales, porous pavement, biodiverse plantings, and other solutions could reduce heat buildup and provide other beneﬁts (Beatley 2000, France 2002, Brandt et al. 2003, Hough 2004). More tree and shrub cover in greenspaces would also help. At a broader scale, a hotter, drier climate is likely to leave some species ‘‘imprisoned” in fragmented patches of nature, and subject to slow decline and disappearance (Figure 12.2). The emerald network solution (Chapter 4) is an important step against climate change. A batch of large natural-vegetation areas spread across the region is the most important component. The emeralds are distributed across gradients from high to low temperature and much to little moisture,

327

328

Big pictures providing suitable locations for many or most terrestrial species to live. As climate warms or cools, species move and relocate in emeralds with suitable conditions. Vegetated corridors that connect the emeralds facilitate the movement of many, though not all, species (Noss 2003). In effect, the emerald network provides ﬂexibility, redundancy, and stability in a changing world. An alternative oft-proposed biodiversity solution is a major north--south corridor. This would facilitate species movement in response to changing temperature. Unfortunately a corridor is simply too narrow as a habitat to effectively support numerous key species. Furthermore a narrow habitat or strip is difﬁcult to protect and sustain long term in an urban region, where nearby people are numerous, human activities extensive, and ongoing outward urbanization expected. Sea-level rise, resulting mainly from continued melting of the Arctic ice cap, Greenland, and Antarctic shelves, is the second major effect of climate change. Sea-level rises of 0.5 to 5+ m (based on ice volume subject to melting) are commonly predicted by specialists, though the rate of melt is difﬁcult to estimate (new data and new processes discovered keep increasing the projected rate). In any event, low-lying coastal areas are likely to be inundated. Coastal cities comprise a major proportion of the world’s cities. They are usually located where a river meets the sea, and almost always have considerable low area. Cities somewhat upriver from the sea, such as Cairo, Dhaka (Bangladesh), and Jacksonville (USA), also have serious inundation problems. Thus sea-level rise seems likely to cause a massive relocation of people and development in many coastal urban regions. This suggests the need for a regional, perhaps 20--30 year plan for sequentially removing people, buildings, roads, and railroads from low areas, and relocating them elsewhere, such as around certain satellite cities (Chapter 8). If planned well, the relocation of people can produce large environmental beneﬁts as well. These might include protective coastal wetlands and self-building dunes, reestablishing biodiversity and recreation around long-lost wetlands, and relocating heavy industry away from water-bodies to designated industry centers with efﬁcient water, power, transport, and waste disposal. Unplanned relocations of people in coastal cities may accelerate outward urbanization and sprawl in the urban region. Alternatively, relocating people and development to areas close to the metro-area border could eliminate any existing sprawl there, and be the stimulus for a regional transitoriented-development solution to transportation (Chapter 2) (Calthorpe 1993, Cervero 1998, Dittmar and Ohland 2004). Indeed sea-level rise augurs poorly for reliance on underground rail or road transportation systems in these cities.

Climate change, species extinction, water scarcity Extensive redistributions of urban populations also provide the opportunity for implementing different transportation modes, such as diverse ﬂexible peoplemovers, small raised monorails, horizontal ski-transport technologies, dual-level shop-front sidewalks, and other methods for relatively short- and mediumdistance movement in metro areas. Climate-change specialists also point to an expected increase, both in size and frequency, of extreme weather events such as intense winds and heavy precipitation. Floods and hurricanes/cyclones tend to cause especially serious problems in urban regions, because of the density of both people and solid human structures like buildings, roads, and bridges. These structures carefully designed by the engineer or architect for society typically have less give, less resilience, than a healthy wetland or natural area, so when confronted with a strong enough force they break. One solution against extreme-weather events is to build using both nature and engineering (including bioengineering), and nature and architecture (biophilic design, including green roofs). Another approach is a higher investment priority in identifying, and placing nature in every location likely to be heavily impacted by extreme-weather events. Steep slopes and narrow ﬂoodplains would become building-free, wetland vegetation would cover low areas, and shrubby strips would cover riparian zones. Minimizing abrupt boundaries and providing multiple lines of defense are additional strategies against extreme-weather events. For example between deep water and uplands, protected gentle slopes, shallow water bodies, wetlands, and natural ridges all help to absorb or dissipate disruptive energy pulses (Costanza et al. 2006). Climate-change scenarios offer an opportunity for urban regions to address many large knotty issues. Reducing carbon-dioxide production calls for citizens and cities alike to change. Implementing solutions to temperature increase, sealevel rise, and extreme-weather events does too. Educating a region’s residents of the problems and laying out possible solutions is a key step. Then, capitalizing on the resulting expectation of change, a broader, bigger set of urban-region issues can be addressed than simply climate change. Species extinction

Species extinction is forever, one of those rare phenomena, like death, that is irreversible. Habitat loss is the major cause, though habitat degradation and perhaps fragmentation are signiﬁcant overall (Wilson 1992, Wilcove et al. 1998, Groom et al. 2006, Primack 2004, Lindenmayer and Burgman 2005). Loss of isolated habitats, such as on islands and in lakes, and of tropical rainforest that holds about half the Earth’s species, has been the core of species extinction.

329

330

Big pictures Human activities in the past century have caused the extinction rate to skyrocket. Although the effects of species extinction, so far, have been minor on society, the seeds of pervasive societal problems are likely being sown, and the ethics of knowingly wiping away species is appalling. Continuing the current rate of biodiversity loss promises a convulsion equivalent to the replacement of dinosaurs by mammals around the globe 65 million years ago. Habitat removal has enormously favored Homo sapiens and about 40 domesticated species, plus range expansions of numerous ‘‘non-native” species (McNeill 2000). Urban regions are generally not the centers of species extinction, though urbanization in about 30 ecoregions, mostly coastal and large-island areas with concentrations of endemic vertebrates, may be quite signiﬁcant (Robert McDonald, personal communication). Rather, urban regions are centers of people, their activities, and their impacts that spread widely outward across the land. Market forces and politics may degrade distant areas, yet public support, votes, and funding in cities may also protect nature and species in distant areas. Rare species probably exist in all urban regions and their protection is valuable (Beatley 1994). However, this has to be placed in a priority context of time and space. In the face of concentrated people, activities, and impacts, plus ongoing outward urbanization, the chance of ‘‘permanent” or long-term protection of rare species in an urban region is low. Still, even short-term protection may sufﬁce if a rare species then spreads to more suitable areas beyond the region. Endemic species which are known only in an urban region (such as Capetown, South Africa and Perth, Australia) warrant special protection effort. Nevertheless, with funding and protection efforts always limited, conservation priorities should normally be in areas outside urban regions, where long-term protection against species extinction is more likely to succeed. The emerald network extending across an urban region, as well as across a state or province or geographic region, was highlighted in the preceding section (also see Chapters 2 and 10) as a way to counteract the effects of climate change. These large natural areas, that can sustain large-home-range vertebrates and minimal viable populations of interior species (Chapter 4), are the keystones. Emeralds in an urban region also have the largest interior-to-border ratios, which greatly facilitates management and protection against habitat degradation by concentrated people and their activities. Yet even emeralds can be degraded. Costa Rica has a widely known set of seven large conservation-park areas. One day the Minister of Natural Resources and Energy commented that the quality of these national parks is only as good as the nation’s economy (Rene Castro Salazar, personal communication). If the economy turns sour and families run out of food and jobs, people look to these areas as safety nets. ‘‘Parques nationales” (national parks, which belong to the people) are

Climate change, species extinction, water scarcity where one can harvest resources, even colonize, if hard times arrive. Emeralds can be stolen, right in an urban region. The corridors of an emerald network have a low interior-to-border ratio and, as noted in the preceding section, are difﬁcult to protect in an urban region with so many people and ongoing urbanization (Briffett et al. 2000, Jongman and Pungetti 2004, Hilty et al. 2006). Perhaps the ‘‘string of pearls” corridor type (Chapters 4 and 10; Color Figure 41) (Forman 2004a), where a tree-lined path is well used and widely known by people, is most likely to persevere over time in an urban region. A sequence of small patches (pearls) of semi-natural vegetation along the path may persist long term as treasured neighborhood parks. Urban regions are the great centers for non-native and invasive species (the nonnative species that colonize and spread in natural ecosystems) (Kareiva et al. 2007). Ships and planes and trains and vehicles bring most non-native (exotic) species to a city. Rail yards are hotspots of non-natives (Muehlenbach 1979, Kowarik and Langer 2005), which also are typically abundant along railroads and roads (Forman et al. 2003). Of particular importance are the extensive residential areas and house lots surrounding a city, where non-native species are purposely and widely planted for diversity and human delight. This massive area teeming with exotics, which are continuously being transported by people and vehicles, is probably the prime source of non-native and invasive species into natural areas across the urban region, and beyond. Some ecologists consider invasive species to be a major current threat to biodiversity, and others consider this to be a minor tangential issue compared, e.g., with habitat loss and habitat degradation due to human activities. Two guidelines seem useful in reducing the chance of biodiversity problems associated with invasive species. First, eliminate known and suspected invasive species from the market, especially the nursery business that supplies wholesale and retail plantings. Second, since emeralds are about the only areas in an urban region where sustained management against invasives is worthwhile for longterm biodiversity protection, surrounding these large natural areas with moderately large adjacent properties containing a low density of non-native species generally makes sense. Also some ‘‘invasives” are really naturalized species. Connectivity for species movement across a whole urban region should reduce the chance of biodiversity loss there. This generally requires greenspace corridors, normally with walking paths, which interconnect with large semi-natural areas around the region’s unbuilt donut (or coastal half-donut) geometry. The corridors should also appropriately connect to adjoining regions, e.g., in the cardinal directions. Transportation corridors can be crossed with major wildlife underpasses and overpasses (Chapter 4) (Trocme et al. 2003, Iuell et al. 2003, Forman et al. 2003). However, strip development along a highway requires a wide

331

332

Big pictures greenspace interruption to facilitate crossing by wildlife. Particular effort for maintaining species connectivity may be appropriate between two nearby cities, which could become connected by future strip development along a highway. The outer portion of the urban-region ring furthest from the city is especially important for biodiversity protection. Mapping and evaluation of biodiversity patterns both in this outer area and in nearby areas of adjoining regions is important. Thus some species only in the region and some species primarily just outside of it may be effectively protected long term. Urbanization around outer satellite cities (Chapter 8) poses a threat, so the particular areas urbanized require careful planning, and concentric-zones urbanization around the major city may be preferable. In short, overall biodiversity loss on the planet will not be arrested in urban regions. But in the face of huge increases in urban people in the next generation, much can be done in these regions to protect their species and especially reduce urban impacts on rare species of other regions. Water scarcity

Humans keep growing in number and spreading out from cities over the land. People want clean freshwater to drink and for domestic use. We also need relatively clean freshwater for agricultural food production and for running industry. The planet operates with essentially a ﬁxed amount of freshwater, which effectively keeps recycling (in a hydrological cycle) through the atmosphere, land, and sea. There seems to be no new freshwater to discover. With a ﬁxed amount and growing human usage, the cost of water is rapidly rising and global water scarcity has arrived. Water scarcity hits us unevenly. People in dry climates suffer ﬁrst and worst. Prolonged droughts, dried-out vegetation, ﬁres, wind erosion of soil, and atmospheric dust are familiar refrains. Human-caused desertiﬁcation, salinized soils, and dropping water tables in the ground due to irrigation make headlines. But water scarcity also impacts urban regions, e.g., recent prolonged droughts in Canberra, Atlanta, Nairobi, and Brasilia, where so many people are packed together. Cities are primarily surrounded by farmland in urban regions (Color Figures 2--39, and Chapter 6). To produce food products for the nearby population, and because land prices are high, irrigation is widely used in urban-region agriculture. Market-gardening near the metropolitan area is a classic example, where a high production of vegetables and fruits continues often year-round. Industry, another major water-user, characterizes and often dominates cities. For instance, megacities in developing nations are effectively industrial cities. Water is used for cooling, and in some cases for power and waste disposal. Rising

Climate change, species extinction, water scarcity prices for scarce water are a serious economic problem for industry around cities, with widely reverberating effects. Water supply for drinking and other daily domestic uses is particularly important in urban regions, because it requires rather clean water in an area bursting with pollution sources. Clean water may be piped long distances into an urban region as an ‘‘inter-basin transfer” (Thayer 2003, Ghassemi 2006) (San Diego, Sydney), but that is expensive, and the process dries out and degrades the source area. Desalinization of salt water can provide a limited amount of water, but at considerable cost. More promising for a city is to rigorously protect natural vegetation around a water-supply reservoir or lake in the outer urban-region ring (New York). This, of course, would be easier if a political/administrative perimeter corresponded closely with that of a dramage basin or catchment, as in the rare case of Florida’s Water Management Districts, which have taxing authority and regulatory power. Using river water as a water-supply source has the advantage of usually having ample water, but the signiﬁcant disadvantage of typically being polluted, which requires expensive water treatment for cleaning. Pollution sources tend to be diverse and widely distributed, and it is extremely difﬁcult to cover a river’s extensive drainage basin with vegetation. In consequence clean rivers in urban regions are a rarity (Paul and Meyer 2001). A water supply based on pumping from streams may serve smaller communities, but for major cities (e.g., Tegucigalpa) the rate of pumping and the diverse acute pollution sources pose limitations. Yet the presence of dirty streams and rivers also means that freshwater is all around the inhabitants of urban regions. Cleaning it up provides relatively clean water for most urban uses. Water conservation and recycling are also potentially major clean-water sources. Groundwater as a water-supply source is a special problem, because of potential diverse pollution sources in an urban region (Bamako) and limited hydrologic water pressure. Yet a well-protected aquifer with considerable hydrologic pressure can be a valuable source of drinking water, as in parts of the European Community and Russia (Margat 1994). Groundwater is also a major source for industrial use in Northern and Central Europe, South Korea, and Japan. In contrast, it is extensively used for irrigated agriculture in Mediterranean areas (e.g., Spain, Greece), Australia, India, and parts of the USA. Groundwater aquifers should be covered with essentially continuous vegetation, especially over the upper portion (Gibert et al. 1994). Otherwise polluting chemicals from development or agriculture percolate into the groundwater, which (except in limestone areas) move slowly and tend to accumulate. The widespread impermeable surface associated with urbanization, and the rarity of remnant wetlands and stormwater-drainage swales, sends rainwater rushing off

333

334

Big pictures the land, thus reducing water recharge into the groundwater. That commonly results in contaminated water and a lowered water table under and around metropolitan areas. An extensive wooded area upwind of an urban region evapo-transpires water into the atmosphere. When cooled, the moist air may produce rain for the urban region and its groundwater. Air pollutants from the urban region in turn may include particles and aerosols around which the moist-air water molecules coalesce, producing rain both in the region and downwind of it. Thus deforestation, overgrazing, or desertiﬁcation of the broad upwind area may contribute to drying out of an urban region. These threads suggest three issues linking water scarcity and urban regions. The growing worldwide scarcity of freshwater causes increasingly severe limitations and costs on clean water supplies for most urban regions. The concentration of people and water uses in urban regions in turn is accentuating the global water scarcity. These reciprocal challenges seem headed for crisis as urban populations are expected to skyrocket in the years just ahead.

Big-ideas--regulations--treaties--policy--governance, megacities, sense of place This umbrella of big pictures highlights strong social and cultural connections. The ﬁrst topic, ‘‘Big-ideas--regulation--treaties--policy--governance,” introduces the human forces that help determine how an urban region is maintained and changed. Then ‘‘Megacities” are examined as the largest human concentrations on Earth. Finally, ‘‘Sense of place” considers a compelling way to bring the giant urban-regions topic to the scale of a person. Big ideas--regulations--treaties--policy--governance

A sequence of big ideas provides a useful framework for urban-region environmental issues, which in turn lead to the regulatory approaches and policy that help to govern human behavior. Consider an overlapping sequence of big ideas through history (McNeill 2000): religion (in diverse forms), rationalism/science, nationalism, hard-work-making-land-productive (or rural righteousness), and communism. After about 1940, economic growth, with roots in ancient China, Europe and elsewhere, became perhaps the most powerful idea of the twentieth century. Embraced by capitalists and communists alike, the economic growth idea transformed society’s focus, relegating land and natural systems to the status of background source of resources for growth. Environmental ideas, again deeply rooted in history, overall mattered little to society until the 1970s catalyst of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring (Buell 1995).

Big-ideas, governance, megacities, sense of place From the 1960s to 1990s a whole set of issues -- wetlands, wolves, foaming rivers, and choking air -- caught the public’s attention, especially in developed nations. Environmentalism had arrived as an embryonic big idea. A closer look is useful (McNeill 2000). From the 1960s, environmental political parties with momentum appeared, and many signiﬁcant initiatives by government and citizens began to reduce water pollution and air pollution. In 1972 an International Conference on the Environment, which led to establishing the United Nations Environment Program, put Stockholm on the map for the burgeoning international environment community. From the 1980s, environmental protection agencies began appearing in developing countries, India was rife with environmental organizations, and Kenya’s Green Belt movement was in full swing. International cooperation on the environment accelerated, the World Bank was forced into environmental awareness, the Brundtland Commission Report stimulated interest in sustainable development, and the Montreal Protocol highlighted the valued linkage of good science and diplomacy. The 1990s brought the UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, where everyone spoke for the environment in development, but few nations were willing to take the necessary steps, and a wide divide between rich and poor nations was revealed. The Kyoto Accord produced wide international agreement on limiting greenhouse gases, yet some key developed nations and various developing nations refused to sign. More recently the important reports of the International Panel on Climate Change (McCarthy et al. 2001, Houghton et al. 2001) have highlighted human-caused effects, especially of greenhouse gases, and their likely consequences. Twentieth-century economic growth models are progressively modiﬁed or replaced by models with a healthy focus on ecological and environmental economics (Chapter 3). The idea of environmentalism is rapidly maturing. The preceding conferences, agreements, and reports are designed to govern behavior of political units and people at the international level. Similarly, regulations, codes, laws, and agreements are drafted to govern behavior at national, state/province, and local levels. Yet regulations have to be policed and enforced, and budgets sustained over time to support the policing of our behavior. Consequently the effectiveness of the regulatory approach is uneven and frequently changing. Around Melbourne (Australia), where cameras record trafﬁc speeds plus turns at busy intersections, and a parking ticket costs nearly seventy times that in Boston, drivers tend to follow the rules. Another familiar problem with the regulatory approach is that regulations themselves can appear, be altered, or disappear ‘‘overnight,” in the proverbial midnight session of politicians. Therefore, rather than being a litany of proposed regulations for urban regions and residents’ use of natural systems, this book focuses on land-use

335

336

Big pictures pattern as a generally more promising and lasting approach. If a particular land use or mosaic of land uses makes good sense and is understood by the public, that pattern is unlikely to be changed overnight. It has staying power likely to be sustained. Of course if the land use does not make good sense or is not known by many people, it is in jeopardy and in some cases should be changed. Land-use planning and regulatory approaches depend primarily on government, and history has provided a complex array of governmental arrangements in urban regions. One might recognize a typical case of a region with a central large city, other municipalities in the metropolitan area, a number of satellite cities, numerous towns and villages, and some overlapping political/administrative units, such as counties at intermediate spatial scales. Yet, San Diego/Tijuana and Strasbourg (France) have urban regions that straddle two nations, so regional policies must evolve through two governmental systems and cultures. Ottawa’s region straddles two provinces and Kansas City (USA) two states, so differing province/state governments and allegiances are involved in developing policy. The Cincinnati Region (USA) includes parts of three states. In contrast, Beijing and Brisbane (Australia) each essentially have a single municipal government that controls the entire urban region. Regional urban planning should be fairly easy for these cities. However, the overnightchange issue exists and, with few checks-and-balances, a plan may be good or bad. The Mexico City, Canberra, and Washington regions, in contrast, are each within a separate federal district (outside of adjoining states/provinces) so, in theory, they control their regions. But in practice, as national capitals, their national governments have much say in planning or regional thinking. As an interesting model, Hannover (Germany) governs its whole region, with local governments for sub-areas. London is an instructive case, because plans have been repeatedly drawn up for the city, and over time the area included has progressively grown. Today’s London plans seem to be approaching, and in some cases exceeding, the urban region of Color Figure 21. Today’s broad vision partially reﬂects population growth, but more important and salutary is that it increasingly embraces natural systems, their uses, and the threats to them. Drainage basins for water supply, a passenger rail network beyond the city, more passenger airports, regional recreational opportunities, and so forth are in the current plans. So, in comparing the several preceding cities, the spatial arrangement of political/administrative units and land uses emerges as a key determinant for policy and governance. A different approach, where national policy tended to create the same pattern around many cities, is informative. In the twentieth century during the Soviet era, the land around, for example, Bucharest, Berlin (Nelson 2006), and Moscow, was molded by strong central policy. Isolated buildings and clusters of

Big-ideas, governance, megacities, sense of place buildings were mostly eliminated, and people basically lived either in industrial collectives (large towns/small cities), agricultural collectives (villages), or scattered historic villages. Analogously, hedgerows and small wooded areas were mainly eliminated, leaving essentially two types of land, extensive ﬁeld areas and large forest patches (see Color Figures 8, 10, and 23). During almost the same period in the USA, government policy produced a repeated land-use pattern around most American cities. US policy was sort of a non-overt-policy or laissez-faire market control, together with numerous indirect incentives and subsidies. This pattern produced around cities covering 50 degrees of longitude and 20 degrees of latitude is widely called American sprawl (Chapter 2). In essence, for several decades two huge nations, the USA and USSR with a deep policy divide, each repeatedly stamped itself all over with a single cookie-cutter imprint, but the contrasting imprints used produced two lone giants unrelated to anyone or to each other. Finally, given this breadth of settings for urban regions, let us brieﬂy explore the possibilities for regional governance using the USA as an example. Both local government and national government create and ﬁnance considerable policy focusing on land use (National Research Council 1999, Irazabal 2005, Babbitt 2005). However regional thinking and initiatives have been sporadic. Local government particularly has little incentive to think regionally. State government, at the intermediate level, could be a force for regionalism, but typically considers it to be a threat. States are often at odds with large-city governments, and only occasionally establish policy for regions within a state. So what can be done for urban regions? Typically the basic approach is to establish a regional organization with legal responsibility and political authority, either in a narrow somewhat-technical domain (e.g., water, recreational trail systems, airports) or in a broader domain relative to land use. Six alternatives might be suggested (Burchell et al. 2005): (1) (2) (3)

(4) (5)

Voluntary confederations: no real power, but can highlight issues and provide information for the public. Public--private coalitions: similar to the preceding, but can also draw up alternative plans for evaluation by policymakers and the public. Federally created regional agencies: specialized functions, e.g., air quality, transportation, or biodiversity, with power and money to implement policies. Regional bodies with broad authority: established by state legislatures, though difﬁcult to sustain reauthorizations and funding (e.g., Portland). Regional governments established by merging municipalities/counties: local governments are replaced by a regional one (e.g., Indianapolis, Miami/Dade Co.).

337

338

Big pictures (6)

Contracts between separate governments: addresses specialized issues/ functions, provides economy of scale, and does not require state legislation.

In the evolution of big ideas, could urban-region planning burst forth as the next big one? Motivators are there in the public mind -- urbanization, sprawl, trafﬁc, shrinking water supply, rising sea level, squatter settlements, not-in-mybackyard, and much more. Solutions targeted to the city or metro area are welcome, but are generally band-aids -- too small and temporary. What will catapult urban regions and environmental planning together as the big solution in the public eye?

Megacities

Cities with a population exceeding 10 million (or 8 million) seem to be in a class of their own, not just quantitatively, but qualitatively. Putting aside the question of what area is included in a population estimate, the number of megacities with >10 million people has clearly accelerated over the past halfcentury (World Urbanization Prospects 2001): If an agglomeration (city and adjacent, or nearly so, cities around it) with >10 million is considered, the number rises to 23, with the addition of Seoul, Cairo, Moscow, London, Tehran, and Istanbul. Another analysis highlights 22 megacities, adding Paris and Lagos, while dropping Dhaka, Beijing, and Istanbul (McNeill 2000). The United Nations Population Division lists 20 such urban agglomerations in 2005: the 17 above plus Cairo, Lagos, and Moscow. No obvious groupings of megacities stand out. More than half are near the sea and have considerable low-lying area subject to ﬂooding. Several are in basins or other locations that accentuate air pollution problems (Los Angeles, Beijing, Mexico City). However, the usual way to divide megacities is their presence in developing nations (Jakarta, Dhaka, Cairo) and developed nations (Tokyo, New York, London). Before brieﬂy considering major environmental dimensions, it is well to note that megacities also illustrate characteristics of cities in

Big-ideas, governance, megacities, sense of place

Figure 12.3 Beloved dragons and ball in Beijing’s ‘‘Forbidden City”, the actual, symbolic, and cultural center for the people of a megacity. An unusual case, Beijing municipal government governs essentially the entire 100 km (65 mi) radius urban region (Color Figure 7). Two of the nine dragons on a brightly colored ceramic courtyard wall. R. Forman photo.

general. Thus any city may have a strong cultural heritage (Figure 12.3), depend on radial highways, have wetlands largely eliminated, or be in a disaster-prone area (Manila, Dhaka, Mexico City) (Steedman 1995). However some attributes characterize megacities and seem to be important in almost all of them (Ezcurra and Mazari-Hiriart 1996, McMichael 2000, El Araby 2002). An extensive impermeable surface across the metropolitan area produces several major effects. The heat-island effect results in high temperatures, especially in summer (Chapter 4) (von Stulpnagel et al. 1990, Ichinose et al. 1999, Arnﬁeld 2003). Heat accentuates certain air pollutants and their effects. The hard-surface area increases ﬂooding, and the so-called 100 year ﬂood may return quite often. With reduced water recharge into the ground, the water table drops over a large area, and soil subsidence under buildings and streets commonly occurs, sometimes quickly. Groundwater is contaminated under and around the massive impermeable surface area. Surface water quality is degraded over a major portion of an urban region (Ren et al. 2003).

339

340

Big pictures Megacity transportation for the huge population also poses numerous problems, from streets clogged with pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles (Beijing, Calcutta) to underground rail systems periodically subject to ﬂooding (New York, Osaka, Moscow). An extensive area of high-vehicle-density and trafﬁc jams is characteristic (Los Angeles, Sao Paulo, Tokyo). Megacities produce huge amounts of CO2 contributing to global climate change. These giant cities have giant ecological footprints (Chapter 3). Within their nations, megacities are all dynamic centers for economic growth, social groups and institutions, politics and government, transportation, culture, jobs, and opportunity. Finally, megacities serve as powerful magnets attracting more people. Megacities in developing countries are somewhat distinctive. A relatively high proportion of urban poor and an abundance of informal housing (squatter settlements) are characteristic. Effective urban infrastructure, such as public transport, clean water supply, and gas/electricity, only serves portions of the metro area. For example, sewage treatment serves a quarter of the people in Calcutta and Dhaka. Because low-lying areas are largely covered with development, ﬂoods commonly cause major problems. Also, megacities in developing countries are normally prime centers of industrial production. Atmospheric particulate pollution, resulting from coal burning, industrial production, and other sources (e.g., fecal particles, dust from upwind soil erosion) tends to be severe. Public health problems are rampant. Street trees are relatively sparse overall, and parks may be invaded by squatters. Effective zoning surrounding the metro area is limited, so land uses are intermixed at a relatively ﬁne scale. This in turn degrades or eliminates water and biodiversity values that depend on large semi-natural patches (Chapter 4). On the other hand, megacities in developed nations tend to expand outward in a low-density form associated with extensive auto usage and thus cover much larger and more distant areas. This process may produce aggregations of buildings around numerous villages, towns, and small cities scattered across the land (London), or result in massive sprawl of houses on relatively large lots (Los Angeles, New York). Both patterns also create an extensive ﬁne-scale road network across the land, with an extensive use of cars and trucks thereon. Building sprawl, road network, and vehicle use, when combined, cause extensive habitat loss and habitat degradation. Megacities in developed nations also are more likely to be ﬁnancial than industrial centers. Urban liveability or quality of life is often considered to be a goal (Costanza et al. 2006). A relatively high priority is given to investment in clean water supply (sometimes transported from a relatively distant forested drainage basin), sewage treatment, a separate pipe system for stormwater drainage and human wastewater, solid waste disposal (transported to distant sites), controls on air pollutants, controls on water pollutants, and the establishment and

Big-ideas, governance, megacities, sense of place maintenance of greenspaces. Zoning and controls on urbanization may be effective in some areas. Regional planning is periodically attempted and occasionally somewhat effective in megacities of developed countries. Like virtually all discussions of megacities, this glimpse cannot avoid the large number and large size of problems facing society (Fuchs et al. 1994, Main and Williams 1994, Stubbs and Clarke 1996, McMichael 2000). Looking for positive signs is a useful strategy, when a giant lies ill before us. The rate of population growth in megacities is slowing, though growth continues, perhaps because people realize these cities are not working well. Speciﬁc ambitious projects, such as housing and sanitation, affecting many people have provided inspiration, even hope (Altshuler and Luberoff 2003). For example, in downtown Seoul, a polluting multilane highway in 2004 was rapidly removed to reestablish a river with powerful aesthetic and recreational dimensions. Beijing, in preparing to host a summer Olympics, established and planted (most people hope ‘‘permanently”) numerous greenspaces. Regional planning, in part driven by environmental considerations such as water supply, air pollution, sprawl, and greenspaces, seems to be growing in megacities and anticipating population growth (Chapter 2). To these few positive signs of life, one can add some ideas for the future. To shift priorities toward low-cost ﬂexible transportation systems or simple healthy safe aesthetic housing types might have positive reverberations. Or target investment to certain existing nodal areas, distributed across the region, to help catalyze the spread of vibrant neighborhoods and communities around them. Or perhaps provide economic opportunities and other incentives for residents of certain targeted areas to move to satellite cities, and in the vacated areas, create places of community value, from treasured playgrounds, trash-removal locations, and park-like meeting places to protected ﬂood-reduction wetlands. Or reduce the dependence on an uncaring global economy, by investing more in local-tonational markets, which spring from local and regional culture and result in economic diversity. Certainly, placing a priority on ongoing high-visibility urbanregion planning is a cost-efﬁcient investment that helps everyone understand today’s megacity, and think about a better tomorrow. If one plots important environmental and human variables against city population size, so far no point is known where thresholds coalesce. Plato advised people to start a new city when one reaches 50 000. Today, is one 10 million megacity better than two 5 million or twenty half-million-people cities? Faced with the multitude of megacity region challenges, powerful positive ideas for the future must be found. Because many more megacities lie just over the horizon. Sense of place

When abroad and asked where I am from, I usually say Boston. If the questioner says, ‘‘You live in the city?,” I respond, ‘‘No, the Boston Region.” A

341

342

Big pictures century or so ago farmland with distinctive rural towns mostly surrounded the city, but now they have largely coalesced into the city’s region. Today Boston is a place for Bostonians, and the Boston Region a place the rest of us relate to. People have an afﬁnity, often strong, for a place (Tuan 1977, Jackson 1994, Nassauer 1997, Buell 2001, 2005). To develop that afﬁnity or place-connectedness, they have lived there for a period, seeing, hearing, smelling, feeling, and experiencing the space. They know some of the people, as well as arrangements of buildings, roads, and greenspaces. A strong loyalty and caring about the place often develops. Hardly anyone expresses a sense of place for the planet or even a metropolitan area. Ignoring nationalism, rather few people express a strong sense of place for a nation or a state or province. The smaller the space the more likely a strong afﬁnity develops, so a town or neighborhood or backyard often engenders a strong sense of place (Tuan 1977, Thayer 2003). Does someone from the Tokyo Region or San Francisco Region or Sao Paulo Region relate to and care about the region as a whole? Perhaps, because we are bathed with regional TV--radio--newspaper stories, entertainment events, sports teams, cultural resources, air pollutants, and more. But ‘‘home range movements” are the real way to gain a sense of place, seeing, feeling, and experiencing a region. The daily home range of a person, analogous to an animal’s home range (Chapter 4), includes the routes and sites visited during most days. Where walking, bicycling, or horse transport prevails, it correlates somewhat with a town or neighborhood. But with a huge net of paved roads used by motorized vehicles, the daily home range may include a few adjacent towns or much of a city. Still, a person’s annual home range, i.e., the spider web of routes and sites visited during most years, is perhaps more relevant where needs and activities are largely done by driving in a vehicle. The annual home range ties the urban region together in one’s mind, creating a sense of place for a region. What does a person feel deeply about in a place? Two components at the human scale may be central, an arrangement of human-made objects and the nature or natural systems interwoven with it. Unlike animals that live in habitat space, rarely does a person live surrounded only by nature, though many of us treasure and are inspired by it. The human-made objects, especially buildings, roads, walkways, vehicles, and so forth, are probably less important individually for a sense of place than is their collective presence and arrangement. Putting aside the problem of ‘‘whose place?,” that design of anthropogenic objects may be sufﬁcient to engender a sense of place for some people. But perhaps most of us would ﬁnd the space incomplete or sterile (Kaplan et al. 1998). Adding trees and birds and water and changing weather, for instance, is needed to bring the place alive. Biophilic design (Chapter 2) speaks to the value, even need, of people for nature. Plants and vegetation are especially familiar manifestations of nature, but wildlife, ﬂowing water, or sky and weather may

Awakening to the urban tsunami be central for some of us (Jackson 1994, Karr 2002, Orr 2002, Yu and Padua 2006). In short, a strong sense of place perhaps especially develops from the arrangement of human objects and nature in the space where a person lives for a period. Finally, consider change. Implicit in the preceding is that the space or place remains in a reasonably similar form over the period of a person’s experience there. That continuity or stability is at odds with the widespread urbanization processes of change in an urban region. People treasure and care about and ﬁght for their town or place. Meanwhile the onrushing wave of population growth and outward development laps around them, undermines and degrades their place, and seems to roll right over it. What does a person with a strong sense of place do? Stay, and suffer? Or leave, and roll outward ahead of the tidal wave?

Awakening to the urban tsunami Today the Earth has six billion people, half living in urban areas. (State of the World’s Cities 2006). One out of two urban people lives in a city of <500 000. A billion people, one out of three urban residents, live (in a ‘‘slum”) with inadequate housing and no or few basic services. By 2030, a single generation ahead, United Nations Population Division data point to a global population of eight billion, with 60 % in urban areas. Do the math: 50 % × 6 = 3 billion urbanites today, and 60 % × 8 = almost 5 billion tomorrow. Two billion humans, a doubling, are expected to live in urban slums. In 2030, big cities will be noticeably more numerous (megacities increasing from 20 to nearly 30, and cities of 1--10 million increasing from about 400 to 600; Robert McDonald, personal communication), and more widely distributed over the land. Meanwhile small and mid-size cities are growing at even faster rates. Equally conspicuous, outward urbanization around nearly all the cities will have created more extensive metropolitan areas, more built-up urban regions, and more-severe heat-island effects. Add it all up. Huge urban population growth, more cities, more big-population cities, cities more widely distributed over the land, cities with larger metropolitan areas, outward urbanization from much longer metro area borders, and dispersed urbanization much further out. Does that add up to an ‘‘urban tsunami” on land? In essence, more cities, more big cities, more widely distributed, with growing populations and with expanding metropolitan areas are all rapidly covering the land -- an urban tsunami easily identiﬁable today. Our powerful turbulent eddies coalesce in places, as the wave sweeps swiftly, almost inexorably across the land. Three other huge human forces are also testing the resilience of nature and the land. Water scarcity worsens leaving cities in short supply, cropland parched, water tables lowered, wildﬁres burning, and answers drying up. Species extinction accelerates as tropical forests shrink, coastal areas are developed, natural

343

344

Big pictures vegetation is removed, and key habitats are fragmented and degraded, all worrisome trends for society’s ecosystem services. Climate change due to human activity becomes more obvious, as air temperatures increase, ice sheets melt, sea level rises, and droughts become more severe. These four giants -- urban tsunami, water scarcity, species extinction, and climate change -- have begun joining forces. Climate change and water scarcity combine to accentuate species loss. The urban tsunami together with climate change makes water scarcity worse and the urban heat-island effect more severe. When will the giant forces reach us? That is, when could the extensive degradation of natural systems overwhelm society’s response capability, producing masses of environmental refugees and widespread disruption of social order? Thresholds or tipping points (Gladwell 2000) resulting in clearly identiﬁable crises may not appear. Each force, or all four together, may continuously and perhaps exponentially gather, until, as Aldo Leopold (1944) expressed the idea, ‘‘One simply woke up one ﬁne spring to ﬁnd the range dominated by a new weed.” Expected scenarios for all four forces suggest grim global conditions in some two to three decades. Will they arrive in tandem or together? Or could the urban tsunami catch and overwhelm us ﬁrst? If one has full faith in growth and market economics (Chapter 3), with inﬁnite substitutability, or in serendipity -- something will come along and solve the problem, then there appears to be no problem. Society can continue as is, and natural systems can keep on degrading. The analyses in this book, along with the growing importance of ecological economics (Chapter 3), ﬁnd that to be a ﬂawed approach. Society can do better. The four giants are certainly after us, and wisdom suggests that we ponder what can be done at least in today’s urban regions. First a reality check is useful. An urban region teems with people (hundreds of thousands, millions), buildings of varied heights and sizes, streets and roads with an extensive permeating surface area, and vehicles in huge numbers consuming fuel and liberating wastes. Moreover, the people’s ecological footprints cover large areas of land. Such a massive system, perhaps paradoxically, has both enormous inertia and extreme instability. Some components, such as an extensive impermeable surface or a road network, can resist almost anything. Meanwhile others, including a watersupply system or tall buildings, can change catastrophically fast. Most people considering signiﬁcant improvement of an object such as an urban region conclude that it is simply too big and too difﬁcult. Wait for a crisis event . . . out of water, massive disease outbreak, bombing, earthquake. Then address problems, rebuild, or even move away. Predicting or waiting for a crisis event is an unlikely strategy for improvement. ‘‘Muddling along” is probably the most likely scenario. Unfortunately, for such a large system this normally

Awakening to the urban tsunami means continuing in a downward or worsening trajectory. ‘‘Entropy increases.” ‘‘The second law is after us.” The region is maintained by regulations and laws at the wrong scale, by indifference or lack of understanding, and by absence of vision. No implementable big idea or vision appears to ﬁght entropy. Like the four giants above, the trajectory points toward crisis. Shadows creep across the land. Two alternatives offer promise. Many people in their life want to improve the world a bit. Incrementalism, resulting from lots of people over time doing this, can produce useful results. What are the likely results? The ﬁrst is illustrated by the reported responses of two leading environmentalists, when separately interviewed (shortly before they died) about their major career accomplishments. After brief reﬂection, each gave essentially the same response: ‘‘I think I slowed the rate of environmental degradation.” They did indeed. A more ambitious goal would be to level off the trajectory of degradation so the world gets no worse. Or better still, turn things around so the trajectory is positive. Most ambitious would be to see a positive world. Incrementalism, while salutary, seems unlikely to achieve these ambitious goals. The second alternative for improving the world is a new vision or visioning approach, occasionally used in planning exercises. One outlines a tangible vision of a positive future (e.g., for an urban region). Later the varied trajectories to get from here to there can be considered. The vision is spatial, so planners, decision-makers, and the public can all envision it. But the vision is outlined in generic form without details. Sketching out a vision is hard, requiring clear thought, broad perspective, and a big-picture solution. After undertaking the vision approach once, I added scattered clouds superimposed over my outline sketches to emphasize the difﬁculty in perceiving and portraying an optimal future. The vision approach is strengthened by several or many people representing diverse ﬁelds and cultures, each outlining a vision and then comparing and evaluating the results. Society should welcome the opportunity to select among competing visions. Indeed the public often follows people with vision. Periodically in this book we have met a rhino in the restaurant, kangaroo in the kitchen, and bats in the bedroom. These beasts were rampaging about, while we carefully adjusted a rug here, wiped clean a spot there, and rearranged our favorite trinkets. In our urban regions, a life-support system, the natural systems upon which we depend daily and for our future, is being ravaged. Meanwhile society concentrates on a housing development here, a new road there, or an economic development project somewhere. How could we miss the big picture before us? A giant bulldozer on automatic rampaging over our most needed land. Scarcely a speck in the urban tsunami . . .

345

Appendix I

Mapping procedure for satellite images

Five steps comprise the mapping procedure for satellite images of the 38 urban regions analyzed (Chapter 5). (1)

Locate data. Using an Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plan sensor, click on Map Search,

(2)

Download color band. After locating the area of interest, click on ‘‘Preview and

toggle on ‘‘ETM+”, and enter the Place (e.g., Cairo, Egypt). Download.” (3)

Select images. In the options for downloading, focus on ETM+ data and individually select an image based on its unique identiﬁer (quadrangle), XXX--XXX.

(4)

Download bands. Using the download interface, which is similar to a ﬁle transfer

(5)

Activate ArcView import. ArcView moves the work forward by extracting the winzip

protocol (FTP) interface, download band 1, band 2 and band 3. (compressed ﬁle), importing the geotif (geographically referenced image), activating the Arc Tool ‘‘Composite Bands”, and scaling the map to the spatial scale of interest.

346

Appendix II

Urbanization models evaluating 18 attributes in 38 regions

Four alternative spatial models (Figure 8.2) were superimposed on the 38 urban region maps (Color Figures) to evaluate the effect of urbanization on 18 attributes measuring natural systems and their human uses. Attributes covered by urbanization were counted or estimated at each of the three time stages in a model. Amount recorded is an index of effect or degradation due to urbanization. The four models were ranked accordingly from best to worst (1 to 4) for each attribute in each region. See Table 8.2 for a summary of Appendix II. The models (see Chapter 8) are: C = Concentric-zones model; S = Satellite-cities model; T = Transportation-corridors model; D = Dispersed-sites model. For Chicago, Philadelphia, and Atlanta, the dispersed-sites model is ranked based on the ﬁrst time stage only; see text. A dash indicates that the attribute is absent or not mapped in the urban-region ring of that city. Asterisks indicate the following. Forest/woodland: overall estimate based primarily on forest/ woodland area covered, and secondarily on proximity to or fragmenting of forest/woodland. Grassland/pastureland: same approach as for preceding. Desert/desertified area: same approach as for preceding. Rivers/major streams: includes canals. Marine coast: along sea or bay. Reservoirs/lakes: an estimate based equally on the percentage of reservoirs/lakes affected and the total length of shoreline affected. Drainage area for water: refers to the area around a water-supply source expected to be especially important for protection, rather than to a particular or complete drainage basin/watershed/catchment. Average distance to major highway: interpreted as the further development is from a major highway the more land is impacted by roads and vehicles. Degree of subdividing region: overall estimate of disruption of connectivity for wildlife movement across a region due to strip development and development in other locations. Edge density: average length of built-area edge or border per unit area in the urban-region ring. City center to metro area border: average distance from a point with in the metro area to its border (the greater the distance, the less accessible surrounding countryside is to urban residents and the less likely outside species will reach city greenspaces). Other attributes combined: letters refer to the attribute present in a region; (a) = greenbelt; (b) = urban growth boundary; (c) = Native Peoples’ land; (d) = aquaculture area; (e) = ﬁre hazard area.

347

Stockholm

Bucharest

Rome

Berlin

London

Urban regions

1

3

3

S

T

D

4

1

2

3

3

4

2

1

2

4

3

1

3

1

Barcelona

2.5 2

2.5 4

1

4

4

2

1

3

Nantes

1

3

3

S

T

D

4

2

1

3

3

4

4

1.5 4

1.5 2

3.5 3

S

T

D

2

4

3

1

2

2

4

2

4

2

2

2

--

1.5 --

--

--

--

--

C

S

T

D

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

Chicago 1

4

2

1

3

3

4

3.5 4

--

--

--

--

4

1 4

1

--

--

--

--

2

2

4

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

2.5 4

2.5 2

2.5 2

2.5 2

1.5 2.5 2

3

2

2.5 3

Philadelphia 3

4

1

2

Ottawa

--

--

--

--

2

3

4

1

4

1

--

--

--

--

3

4

2

1

3

3

2.5 1

2.5 3

4

3.5 2.5 1

2

1

San Diego/Tij’a

1.5 1.5 2.5 3

1.5 4

Grassland/pastureland∗

3.5 1

C

--

1.5 1.5 --

1.5 3

Forest/woodland∗

3

C

Recreation/tourism sites (%)

3

C

Biodiversity sites (%)

Santiago

Mexico City

Atlanta

Portland

Edmonton 2

1 1

2

3

2

3

4

1

--

--

--

--

1.5 4

4

3

2

1

3

2

4

1

3

2

--

--

--

--

4

2

3

4

1

4

2.5 2

2.5 1

1

2.5 3

4

1

2.5 4

1.5 1

4

2

2

2

2

--

--

--

--

4

2

1

3

3

2

4

1

2

3.5 4

2.5 1

3.5 3.5 4

2

1

3.5 3.5 2.5 3.5 2

Tegucigalpa

Brasilia 4

1

3

4

1

2

2

3

4

1

--

--

--

--

2.5 2

2.5 3

1

4

3

2

1

4

3.5 3

1.5 4

1.5 1

3.5 2

Iquitos 2

1

--

--

--

--

2

3

4

1

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

Bamako 2

4

2

2

Abeche

4

3

4

3.5 1

--

--

--

--

2

3.5 2

3.5 1

3 4

1.5 2.5 --

3.5 2.5 --

3.5 2.5 --

--

--

--

--

2

2.5 4

1

2.5 1

--

--

--

--

4

2

1

3

3.5 1.5 4

2

1

1.5 2.5 --

1.5 2.5 2

3.5 2

2

2.5 4

1

3

2

1

4

Seoul

3.5 1.5 3

2.5 3.5 4

2.5 1.5 2

2.5 2

1.5 3

3.5 4

3.5 2.5 4

2

Beijing

3.5 1.5 2.5 1.5 1

3.5 2.5 3

1

Moscow

1.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 3

East London

1.5 2.5 1

3

4

1

2

2.5 3

2.5 4

2.5 1

2.5 3

4

1

Nairobi

2.5 2

Cairo

2.5 4

--

--

--

--

Tehran --

--

--

--

--

--

4

2

2

2

3

4

--

--

--

--

2

2

3

4

1

2

1

4

3

2

--

--

--

--

3

4

2

1

2

4

1.5 3

2.5 4

1 2.5 4

4

1

2

4

3

1

Kagoshima

1.5 1

2

4

3

1

Erzurum

2.5 2.5 2

2.5 3

2.5 3

--

2

1

2.5 4

4

1

2.5 1

--

Ulaanbaatar

2.5 3

Sapporo

2.5 3

4

2

1

3

Kuala Lumpur

Bangkok

Cuttack 3

4

4

3

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

1.5 2

3

4

4

3

4

2

--

--

--

--

2

4

3

1

--

--

--

--

2

3

4

1

4

3.16

1.69

1.5 2.38

1

2

4

3

2

4

3

1

--

--

--

--

2

4

2

2

2

2.6

3.45

1.95

2.71

2.94

2.53

1.81

1.5 1.5 2.77

4

1.78 2.93 1.5 2.91

4

3

1.5 2.51

Rahimyar Khan 1.5 3

3

1.5 3

3.5 3

1.5 3.5 1

2.5 1.5 2

4

1.5 1

3

4

1.5 1

Canberra 1.5 1.5 3

Samarinda

1.5 2.5 1.5 2

1.5 3

3.5 3

3.5 1

1.5 3

Average

--

--

--

S

T

D

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

S

T

D

--

--

--

--

4

2

1

3

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

1

2

3.5 4

S

T

D

3

4

2

2.5 4

1

2.5 1

3.5 2

1.5 4

1.5 3

3.5 1

--

--

S

T

D

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

C

S

T

D

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

Flood hazard sites (%)

--

--

C

4

3

--

2

4

2

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

3

1

3

3

2

1

4

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

2.5 1

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

1

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3.5 --

1.5 --

1.5 --

3.5 --

3.5 4

2

3

3

1

3

--

--

--

--

2

4

3.5 2.5 3

1

3.5 --

2

1

3.5 --

3.5 --

1.5 --

1.5 --

3.5 --

-- - --

3.5 2.5 --

1.5 2.5 --

1.5 4

--

3.5 2

2

1

3.5 1

3.5 1

Major wetlands (% cover)

1

2

3.5 3

C

Rivers/major streams (km length)∗

--

C

Nearby slopes facing city (% cover)

--

C

Desert/desertiﬁed area∗

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

3

1

3

2

4

1

3

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

1

2

4

3.5 --

2

1

3.5 --

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

2

4

1

3

2

1

4

--

--

--

--

2

4

1

3

--

--

--

--

4

2

1

3

3

2

1

4

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

1

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

1

2

4

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

4

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

4

--

--

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

2

4

3

1

3

3

1

3

4

2

1

3

3.5 --

3.5 --

1

2

1

2.5 3

1

2.5 2

3

2.5 2

1

2.5 4

--

--

--

--

4

2

1

3

4

2

1

3

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

--

1.5 --

1.5 --

4

2.5 2.5 --

2.5 2.5 --

--

4

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

2.5 2

4

1

2.5 2.5 --

--

2

4

2

2

--

--

--

--

2.5 2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

2.5 2.5 --

3

4

2

1

3

3

1

3

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

3

1

3

--

--

--

--

3

1

4

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

2

--

3.5 --

2

1 2

1

--

3

3

1

3

--

--

--

4

2

1

3

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

2.5 --

2.5 --

2.5 --

2.5 --

4

1.5 2

1.5 1

3

3.5 3.5 4

2

1

2.5 4

4

1

--

3.5 --

1

3.5 3.5 3

--

--

--

--

2.5 3

3.5 --

1.5 --

1.5 --

3.5 --

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

2

1

3

2

1

4

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

4

3

4

1

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

4

--

--

--

--

3

3

1.5 1

1.5 3

2

4

2

2

2

4

3

1

3.5 1.5 1.5 3

1.5 3

1.5 4

3.5 1.5 1.5 2

3.5 4

2

1

3.5 3

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

4

1

2

2

4

3

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

2

1

4

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

3

1

3

--

--

--

--

1.5 --

4

3

1.5 --

2.5 3

4

1

1.5 2 4

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

2.5 2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

1.5 4

3

4

2

1

3

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3.37

2.16

1.08

3.39

2.80

1.88

3.21

1.54

(cont.)

1.5 2.63

4

3

1.5 2.63

1.5 2.73

3.5 2.74

3.5 2.12

1.5 2.41

1.5 2.99

4

3

1.5 2.34

--

--

--

--

2.5 2.50

2.5 2.88

2.5 2.63

2.5 2.00

Barcelona

Stockholm

Bucharest

Rome

Berlin

Urban regions

4

3

2

S

T

D

--

--

--

--

2

4

3

1

--

--

--

--

4

2

1

3

3

4

2

1

Nantes

2

2

4

2

Chicago --

--

--

--

2

3

4

1

San Diego/Tij’a

1.5 4

D

2.5 3

2.5 4

2.5 2

2.5 1

4

1

2

3

1.5 3

1

2

1.5 4

1.5 4

3

4

1.5 3

2

3.5 2.5 --

T

D

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

2

4

3

1

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

4

1.5 --

3

S

T

D

--

--

1.5 --

C

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

Market-gardening area (% cover)

2.5 --

--

--

1

S

1

3.5 4

C

Drainage area for water (% cover)∗

1

T

2

3

4

S

1.5 3

C

Philadelphia --

--

--

--

4 1

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

--

--

---

--

--

--

1 3

3

3

--

---

--

--

--

4

1.5 2

1.5 1

4

3

4

1

2

2

4

3

1

--

--

--

--

Atlanta --

--

3.5 --

2

1

3.5 --

4

2

1

3

2.5 2.5 4

2.5 4

2.5 1

3.5 --

2

1

Edmonton --

Portland

2.5 2.5 2

--

--

--

--

Ottawa

3.5 --

--

--

--

--

3.5 3

2

1

3.5 2

Reservoirs/lakes (% and shoreline km)∗

1

C

Marine coast (km length)∗

London

(cont.)

Mexico City --

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

1

4

2

--

--

--

--

Santiago --

--

--

--

Brasilia

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

2.5 4

2.5 2

2.5 1

2.5 3

2.5 2

2.5 3

2.5 1

2.5 4

--

--

--

--

Tegucigalpa --

--

--

--

Iquitos --

--

--

--

--

4

2

1

3

2

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

--

3.5 --

1

3.5 --

--

--

--

--

Cairo

Nairobi --

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

Bamako

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

2

2

2

4

3

2

1

4

2.5 2.5 --

2.5 2.5 --

2.5 2.5 --

2.5 2.5 --

--

--

--

--

East London --

--

--

--

Abeche --

--

--

--

--

--

3

4

--

--

--

--

--

--

1.5 --

1.5 --

3

4

1.5 --

1.5 --

3

2

1

4

Beijing --

--

--

--

Moscow 1 2

--

--

--

--

2

2

4

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

1.5 3

3

4

1.5 4

--

--

--

--

Seoul 2.5 2

4

1

1.5 --

3.5 --

3.5 --

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

2.5 2

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

2.5 --

4

2.5 4

3

--

Ulaanbaatar

2.5 --

1

Sapporo

2.5 2

--

--

--

--

Tehran

1.5 --

4

2

1

3

4

2

1

3

4

1

2

3

--

Erzurum 2

4

2

2

--

--

--

--

2

4

2

2

--

--

--

Bangkok 1

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

Canberra

Samarinda

--

-1.5 --

3

4

1.5 --

--

--

--

--

Rahimyar Khan --

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

2.5 2.5 4

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

2.5 2.5 1.5 --

2.5 2.5 3

2.5 2.5 1.5 --

3.5 2

1.5 2

1.5 4

2.5 1.5 -2.5 4

Cuttack 3.5 2

Kuala Lumpur

2.5 1.5 --

2.5 3

3

2

1

4

--

--

--

--

1.5 4

4

2

1.5 3

Kagoshima 3

2.80

2.50

1.95

2.75

3.18

2.29

1.45

3.08

2.72

2.68

2.27

2.33

2.64

2.61

2.71

2.04

Average

4

3

2

S

T

D

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

1

4

2

3

1

4

2

3

1

4

2

3

1

4

2

--

--

--

--

3

T

D

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

1

2

2

3

4

S

T

D

4

3

2

1

4

3

2

1

4

3

2

1

4

3

2

1

4

3

2

1

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

4

3

2

1

4

3

2

1

km2 )∗

3

4

1

2

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

1

2

3

S

T

D

3

2

1

4

3

2

1

4

3

2

1

4

2

3.5 --

T

D

(a)

1

S

--

--

3.5 --

C

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

Other attributes

4

C

3

2

1

4

3

2

1

4

--

--

--

--

(e)

4

3

1

2

--

--

--

--

combined∗

3

2

1

4

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

3

2

1

4

3

2

1

4

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

4

1

2

1 --

--

3.5 3.5 --

1

2 --

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

3

1

2.5 4

2.5 2

3.5 3.5 --

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

(c) (e) (a) (c) (b)

3.5 4

1.5 2

1.5 2

3.5 2

3

2

1

4

City center to metro area border (km)∗

1

C

Edge density (km length per

1

4

S

2

C

Degree of subdividing region (high to low)∗

1

C

Average distance to major highway (km)∗

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

2.5 --

1

4

2.5 --

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

3

1

4

2

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

2

1

4

3

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

4

1

2

3

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

4

1

3

2

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

3

1

4

2

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

3

1

4

2

--

--

(a)

3.5 --

2

1

3.5 --

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

4

1

2

3

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

(d)

4

1

2

3

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

(e)

3.5 --

1.5 --

1.5 --

3.5 --

3

2

1

4

4

3

2

1

3

4

1

2

--

--

--

--

3.60

1.80

1.40

3.20

3.00

2.00

1.00

4.00

4.00

3.00

2.00

1.00

3.00

4.00

1.00

2.00

3.10

1.13

3.57

2.20

References

AASHTO. (2001). A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets: 2001. Washington, DC: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Ofﬁcials. Acebillo, J. and Folch, R. (directors) (2000). Atles Ambiental de l’Area de Barcelona: Balanc de recursos i problemes. Barcelona: Ariel Ciencia and Barcelona Regional. Aghion, P. and Howitt, P. (1998). Endogenous Growth Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Ahern, J. (2002). Greenways as Strategic Landscape Planning: Theory and Application. Wageningen, Netherlands: Wageningen University Press. Ahrens, C. D. (1991). Meteorology Today: An Introduction to Weather, Climate, and the Environment. St. Paul, MN, USA: West Publishing. Altshuler, A. and Luberoff, D. (2003). Mega-Projects: The Changing Politics of Urban Public Investment. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Anderson, M. G. (2003). Ecoregional Conservation: A Comprehensive Approach to Conserving Biodiversity. Boston: The Nature Conservancy. Antrop, M. (2000). Changing patterns in the urbanized countryside of Western Europe. Landscape Ecology, 15, 257--70. Arnﬁeld, A. J. (2003). Two decades of urban climate research: a review of turbulence, exchanges of energy and water, and the urban heat island. International Journal of Climatology, 23, 1--26. Arnold, C. L., Jr. and Gibbons, C. J. (1996). Impervious surface coverage. American Planning Association Journal, 62, 243--58. Asare Afrane, Y., Klinkenberg, E., Drechsel, P., et al. (2004). Does irrigated urban agriculture inﬂuence the transmission of malaria in the city of Kumasi, Ghana? Acta Tropica, 89, 125--34. Asomani-Boateng, R. (2002). Urban cultivation in Accra: an examination of the nature, practices, problems, potentials, and urban planning implications. Habitat International, 26, 591--607. Atauri, J. A. and de Lucio, J. V. (2001). The role of landscape structure in species richness: distribution of birds, amphibians, reptiles and lepidopterans in Mediterranean landscapes. Landscape Ecology, 16, 147--59. Atkinson, A., Davila, J. D., Fernandess, E., and Mattingly, M. (eds.) (1999). The Challenge of Environmental Management in Urban Areas. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.

352

References Avin, U. and Bayer, M. (2003). Right-sizing urban growth boundaries. Planning, 69 (February), 22--7. Babbitt, B. (2005). Cities in the Wilderness. Washington, DC: Island Press. Bacaria, J., Folch, R., Paris, A., et al. (1999). Atlas Ambiental del Mediterraneo. Barcelona: Institut Catala de la Mediterrania, Institut Cartograﬁc de Catalunya, and ERF Gestio i Communicacio Ambiental. Bahlburg, C. H. (2003). A planning system of open spaces: The Berlin-Brandenburg Common Regional Plan (Germany), in Actes de III Simposi internacional sobre espais naturals i rurals en arees metropolitans i periurbanes, Barcelona: Initiative Communautaire Interreg III B, 85--90. Bailey, R. G. (1995). Descriptions of the Ecoregions of the United States. Washington, DC: Miscellaneous Publication no. 1391, US Forest Service. Bailey, R. G. (1998). Ecoregions: The Ecosystem Geography of Oceans and Continents. New York: Springer-Verlag. Baker, W. L. (1989). A review of models of landscape change. Landscape Ecology, 2, 111--33. Barbier, E. B. (1987). The concept of sustainable economic development. Environmental Conservation, 14, 101--10. Barbour, M. G., Burk, J. H., and Pitts, W. D. (1987). Terrestrial Plant Ecology. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin/Cummings. Barker, T. and Sutcliffe, A. (eds.) (1993). Megalopolis: The Giant City in History. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Barraco, H., Pares, M., Prat, A., and Terradas, J. (1999). Barcelona 1885--1999, Ecologia d’una Ciutat. Barcelona: Ajuntament de Barcelona. Bartels, J. M. (ed.) (2000). Managing Soils in an Urban Environment. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy. Bartuska, T. J. (1994). Cities today: the imprint of human needs in urban patterns and form. In T. J. Bartuska and G. L. Young (eds.), The Built Environment: Creative Inquiry Into Design and Planning. USA: Crisp Publications, 273--88. Beardsley, J. (1997). A Mickey Mouse utopia. Landscape Architecture (February), 76--93. Beatley, T. (1994). Habitat Conservation Planning: Endangered Species and Urban Growth. Austin: University of Texas Press. Beatley, T. (2000). Green Urbanism: Learning from European Cities. Washington, DC: Island Press. Beatley, T., Brower, D. J., and Schwab, A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Coastal Zone Management. Washington, DC: Island Press. Beesley, K. B. and Cocklin, C. (1982). Perspectives on the Rural--Urban Fringe. Ontario, Canada: Occasional Papers in Geography No. 2, University of Guelph. Beier, P. and Noss, R. F. (1998). Do habitat corridors provide connectivity? Conservation Biology, 12, 1241--52. Benﬁeld, F. K., Raimi, M. D., and Chen, D. D. T. (1999). Once There Were Greenfields: How Urban Sprawl Is Undermining America’s Environment, Economy, and Social Fabric. Washington, DC: Natural Resources Defense Council and Surface Transportation Policy Project.

353

354

References Benﬁeld, F. K., Terris, J., and Vorsangeret, N. (2001). Solving Sprawl: Models of Smart Growth in Communities Across America. New York: Natural Resources Defense Council. Bengston, D. N. and Youn, Y. C. (2006). Urban containment policies and the protection of natural areas: the case of Seoul’s greenbelt. Ecology and Society, 11, 3. Bennett, A. F. (2003). Linkages in the Landscape: The Role of Corridors and Connectivity in Wildlife Conservation. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK: IUCN-The World Conservation Union. Berg, P. and Dasmann, R. (1977). Reinhabiting California, Ecologist, 7 (December), 377--401. Berger, A. (2006). Drosscape: Wasting Land in Urban America. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Berke, P. R., Godschalk, D. R., Kaiser, E. J., and Rodriguez, D. A. (2006). Urban Land Use Planning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Berkowitz, A. R., Nilon, C. H., and Hollweg, K. S. (eds.) (2003). Understanding Urban Ecosystems: A New Frontier for Science and Education. New York: Springer. Berling-Wolff, S. and Wu, J. (2004). Modeling urban landscape dynamics: a review. Ecological Research, 19, 119--29. Billington, C. and Tozer, E. W. (1997). Ecological Inventory of NCC Urban Corridors. Ottawa: National Capital Commission. Binford, M. W. and Karty, R. (2006). Riparian greenways and water resources. In P. C. Hellmund and D. A. Smith (eds.), Designing Greenways: Sustainable Landscapes for Nature and People. Washington D.C.: Island Press, 108--57. Bird, D., Varland, D., and Negro, J. (eds.) (1996). Raptors in Human Landscapes: Adaptations to Built and Cultivated Environments. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Blondel, J. and Aronson, J. (1999). Biology and Wildlife of the Mediterranean Region. New York: Oxford University Press. Bloom, P. H. and McCrary, M. D. (1996). The urban buteo: red-shouldered hawks in Southern California. In D. M. Bird, D. E. Varland and J. J. Negro (eds.), Raptors in Human Landscapes. San Diego: Academic Press, 31--9. Blowers, A. (ed.) (2003). Planning the Sustainable City Region. London: Earthscan. Boada, M. and Capdevila, L. (2000). Barcelona: Biodiversitat urbana. Barcelona: Ajuntament de Barcelona. Bolund, P. and Hunhammar, S. (1999). Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecological Economics, 29, 293--302. Botterton, C. A. (2001). India’s ‘‘Project Tiger” reserves: the interplay between ecological knowledge and the human dimensions of policymaking for protected habitats. In V. H. Dale and R. A. Haeuber (eds.), Applying Ecological Principles to Land Management. New York: Springer, 136--62. Boulding, K. E. (1964). The Meaning of the Twentieth Century. New York: Harper & Row. Boyden, S., Miller, S., Newcombe, K., and O’Neill, B. (1981). The Ecology of a City and Its People: The Case of Hong Kong. Canberra: Australian National University Press.

References Braat, L. C. and Steetskamp, I. (1991). Ecological-economic analysis for regional sustainable development. In R. Costanza (ed.), Ecological Economics: The Science and Management of Sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press, 269--88. Brandle, J. R., Hintz, D. L., and Sturrock, J. W. (eds.) (1988). Windbreak Technology. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Brandt, J., Vejre, H., Mander, A., and Antrop, M. (2003). Multifunctional Landscapes. Southampton, UK: WIT. Breen, A. and Rigby, D. (1996). The New Waterfront: A Worldwide Urban Success Story. New York: McGraw-Hill. Brenneisen, S. (2006). Space for urban wildlife: designing green roofs as habitats in Switzerland. Urban Habitats, 14(1). Breuste, J., Feldmann, H., and Uhlmann, O. (eds.) (1998). Urban Ecology. Berlin: Springer. Brifﬁtt, C. (2001). Is managed recreational use compatible with effective habitat and wildlife occurrence in urban open space corridor systems? Landscape Research, 26, 137--63. Briffett, C., Sodhi, N. S., Kong, L., and Yuen, B. (2000). The planning and ecology of green corridor networks in tropical urban settlements: a case study. In J. R. Craig, N. Mitchell, and D. A. Saunders (eds.), Nature Conservation 5: Nature Conservation in Production Environments: Managing the Matrix. Chipping Norton, Australia: Surrey Beatty, pp. 411--26. Browder, J. O. and Godfrey, B. J. (1997). Rainforest Cities: Urbanization, Development, and Globalization of the Brazilian Amazon. New York: Columbia University Press. Buell, L. (1995). The Environmental Imagination: Thoreau, Nature Writing, and the Formation of American Culture. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Buell, L. (2001). Writing for an Endangered World: Literature, Culture, and Environment in the U.S. and Beyond. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Buell, L. (2005). The Future of Environmental Criticism: Environmental Crisis and Literacy Imagination. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Bullard, R. D., Johnson, G. S., and Torres, A. O. (2000). Sprawl City: Race, Politics, and Planning in Atlanta. Washington, DC: Island Press. Burchell, R. W., Downs, A., McCann, B., and Mukherji, S. (2005). Sprawl Costs: Economic Impacts of Unchecked Development. Washington, DC: Island Press. Burel, F. and Baudry, J. (1999). Ecologie du paysage: Concepts, methodes et applications. Paris: Editions TEC & DOC. Burgi, M., Hersperger, A. M., and Schneeberger, N. (2004). Driving forces of landscape change -- current and new directions. Landscape Ecology, 19, 857--68. Busquets, J. (2005). La Ciutat Vella de Barcelona: Un Passat Amb Future. Barcelona: Ajuntament de Barcelona. Calthorpe, P. (1993). The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, Community, and the American Dream. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Calthorpe, P. and Fulton, W. (2001). The Regional City: Planning for the End of Sprawl. Washington, DC: Island Press.

355

356

References Campbell, S. (1996). Green cities, growing cities, just cities?: Urban planning and the contradictions of sustainable development. Journal of the American Planning Association, 62, 296--312. Campbell, S. and Fainstein, S. S. (eds.) (2003). Readings in Planning Theory. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Carbonell, A. and Yaro, R. D. (2005). American spatial development and the new megalopolis. Land Lines, 17(2), 1--4. Cervero, R. (1993). Ridership Impacts of Transit-Focused Development in California. Berkeley: Monograph 45, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California. Cervero, R. (1998). The Transit Metropolis: A Global Inquiry. Washington, DC: Island Press. Chen, A., Liu, G. C., and Zhang, K. H. (2004). Urban Transformation in China. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing. Cheshire, P. C. (1988). Urban Problems in Western Europe: An Economic Analysis. London: Unwin Hyman. Christaller, W. (1933). Die zentraler Orte in Suddeutschland. Jena: Fischer. Cityspace: An Open Space Plan for Chicago. (1998). Chicago: City of Chicago, Chicago Park District, and Forest Preserve District of Cook County. Clark, P. (ed.) (2006). The European City and Green Space: London, Stockholm, Helsinki and St. Petersburg, 1850--2000. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing. Clevenger, A. P. and Waltho, N. (2005). Performance indices to identify attributes of highway crossing structures facilitating movement of large mammals. Biological Conservation, 121, 453--64. Climate Change Impacts on the United States (2001). The Potential Consequences of Climatic Variability and Change. (2001). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Report of National Assessment Synthesis Team, US Global Change Research Program. Colburn, E. A. (2004). Vernal Pools: Natural History and Conservation. Blacksburg, VA: McDonald and Woodward Publishing. Collinge, S. K. and Forman, R. T. T. (1998). A conceptual model of land conversion processes: predictions and evidence from a microlandscape experiment with grassland insects. Oikos, 82, 66--84. Congress for the New Urbanism. (2000). Charter of the New Urbanism. New York: McGraw-Hill. Corn, W. M. (1983). Grant Wood: The Regionalist Vision. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Costa, J. E. and Baker, V. R. (1981). Surficial Geology: Building with the Earth. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Costanza, R. (ed.) (1991). Ecological Economics: The Science and Management of Sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press. Costanza, R. (2000). The dynamics of the ecological footprint concept. Ecological Economics, 32, 341--5. Costanza, R., Cumberland, J. C., Daly, H. E., et al. (1997a). An Introduction to Ecological Economics. Boca Raton. FL: St. Lucie Press.

References Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R., et al. (1997b). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387, 253. Costanza, R., Mitsch, W. J., and Day, J. W., Jr. (2006). New vision for New Orleans and the Mississippi delta: applying ecological economics and ecological engineering. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 4, 465--72. Costa-Pierce, B., Desbonnet, A., Edwards, P., and Baker, D. (eds.) (2005). Urban Aquaculture. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing. Cothrel, S. R., Vimmerstedt, J. P., and Kost, D. A. (1997). In situ recycling of urban deciduous litter. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 29, 295--8. Covich, A. P. (1976). Analyzing shapes of foraging areas: some ecological and economic theories. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 7, 235--57. Craul, P. J. (1999). Urban Soils: Applications and Practices. New York: John Wiley. Cronon, W. (1991). Nature’s Metropolis: Chicago and the Great West. New York: W. W. Norton. Cuperus, R., Backermans, M. G. G. J., Udo de Haes, H. A., and Canters, K. J. (2001). Ecological compensation in Dutch highway planning. Environmental Management, 27, 75--89. Daily, G. and Ellison, K. (2002), The New Ecology of Nature: A Quest to Make Conservation Profitable. Washington, DC: Island Press. Daily, G. C. (1997). Nature’s Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Washington, DC: Island Press. Dale, V. H. and Haeuber, R. A. (eds.) (2001). Applying Ecological Principles to Land Management. New York: Springer. Daley, R. and City of Chicago. (2002). A Guide to Rooftop Gardening. Chicago: Chicago Department of Environment. Daly, H. E. (1990). Toward some operational principles of sustainable development. Ecological Economics, 2, 1--6. Daly, H. E. and Cobb, J. B. (1989). For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy Toward Community, the Environment and a Sustainable Future. Boston: Beacon. Daniels, T. (1999). When City and Country Collide: Managing Growth in the Metropolitan Fringe. Washington, DC: Island Press. Danielsen, F., Sorensen, M. K., Mette, F., et al. (2005). The Asian tsunami: a protective role for coastal vegetation. Science, 310, 643. Dasgupta, P. S. and Heal, G. M. (1974). The optimal depletion of exhaustible resources. Review of Economic Studies, Symposium on the Economics of Exhaustible Resources. pp. 3--28. Davis, B. N. K. (1976). Wildlife, urbanization and industry. Biological Conservation, 10, 249--91. Davis, J., Ossowski, R., Daniel, J., and Barnett, S. (2001). Stabilization and savings funds for non-renewable resources: experience and ﬁscal policy implications. Washington, DC: Occasional Paper 205. International Monetary Fund. De Blij, H. J. (1977). Human Geography. New York: John Wiley. Decamps, H. and Decamps, O. (2001). Mediterranean Riparian Woodlands. Arles, France: Tour du Valat.

357

358

References Decamps, H. and Decamps, O. (2004). Au Printemps des Paysages. Paris: Buchet/Chastel Ecologie. Diamond, H. L. and Noonan, P. F. (1996). Land Use in America. Washington, DC: Island Press. DiGregoria, J., Luciani, E., and Wynn, S. (2006). Integrating transportation and resource conservation planning: conservation banking. In C. L. Irwin, P. Garrett, and K. P. McDermott (eds.), Proceedings of the 2005 International Conference on Ecology and Transportation. Raleigh, USA: CTE, North Carolina State University, 101--10. Dittmar, H. and Ohland, G. (2004). The New Transit Town, Best Practices in Transit Oriented Development. Washington, DC: Island Press. Donahue, B. (1999). Reclaiming the Commons: Community Farms and Forests in a New England Town. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Dramstad, W., Olson, J. D., and Forman, R. T. T. (1996). Landscape Ecology Principles for Landscape Architecture and Land-use Planning. Washington, DC: Island Press and Harvard University Graduate School of Design. Dreier, P., Mollenkopf, J., and Swanston, T. (2004). Place Matters: Metropolitics for the Twenty-First Century. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. Duany, A., Plater-Zyberk, E., and Speck, J. (2000). Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream. New York: North Point Press. Dunnett, N. and Kingsbury, N. (2004). Planting Green Roofs and Living Walls. Portland, OR: Timber Press. Dwyer, J. F. and Chavez, D. J. (2005). The challenges of managing public lands in the wildland-urban interface. In S. W. Vince et al. (eds.), Forests at the Wildland-Urban Interface: Conservation and Management. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 269--83. Easterlin, R. A. (2003). Explaining happiness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 100, 11176. Eaton, M. M. (1997). The beauty that requires health. In J. I. Nassauer (ed.), Placing Nature: Culture and Landscape Ecology. Washington, DC: Island Press, 85--106. El Araby, M. (2002). Urban growth and environmental degradation: the case of Cairo, Egypt. Cities, 19, 389--400. El Serafy, S. (1991). The environment as capital. In R. Costanza (ed.), Ecological Economics: The Science and Management of Sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press, 168--75. Elmqvist, T., Colding, J., Barthel, S., et al. (2004). The dynamics of social-ecological systems in urban landscapes: Stockholm and the National Urban Park, Sweden. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1023, 308--22. English Nature. (2003). Green Roofs: Their Existing Status and Potential for Conserving Biodiversity in Urban Areas. Peterborough, UK: English Nature Research. Epstein, D. (1973). Brasilia, Plan and Reality. Berkeley: University of California Press. Erickson, D. (2006). MetroGreen: Connecting Open Space in North American Cities. Washington, DC: Island Press. Ezcurra, E. and Mazari-Hiriart, M. (1996). Are megacities viable? A cautionary tale from Mexico City. Environment, 38, 6--35. Fahrig, L. (2003). Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 34, 487--515.

References Fainstein, S. S. and Campbell, S. (eds.) (1996). Readings in Urban Theory. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Farber, S. (1987). The value of coastal wetlands for protection of property against hurricane damage. Journal of Environmental and Economic Management, 14, 143--51. Farina, A. (2005). Principles and Methods in Landscape Ecology. Berlin/New York: Springer. Ferguson, J., Connelly, M., Forman, R., et al. (1993). 1992 Open Space Plan. Concord, Massachusetts, USA: Natural Resources Commission. Fernandez-Juricic, E. (2000). Local and regional effects of pedestrians on forest birds in a fragmented landscape. Condor, 102, 247--55. Fischer, J., Lindenmayer, D. B., and Manning, A. D. (2006). Biodiversity, ecosystem function, and resilience: ten guiding principles for commodity production landscapes. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 4, 80--6. Folch, R. (2000). Socio-Economic Considerations of Territorial Zoning in the Barcelona Metropolitan Area: With General Objectives, by Josep Acebillo. Barcelona: Estudi Ramon Folch. Forman, R. T. T. (1964). Growth under controlled conditions to explain the hierarchical distribution of a moss, Tetraphis pellucida. Ecological Monographs, 34, 1--25. Forman, R. T. T. (ed.) (1979a). Pine Barrens: Ecosystem and Landscape. New York: Academic Press. Forman, R. T. T. (1979b). The Pine Barrens of New Jersey: an ecological mosaic. In R. T. T. Forman (ed.), Pine Barrens: Ecosystem and Landscape. New York: Academic Press, 569--85. Forman, R. T. T. (1987). The ethics of isolation, the spread of disturbance, and landscape ecology, in M. G. Turner (ed.), Landscape Heterogeneity and Disturbance. New York: Springer-Verlag, 213--29. Forman, R. T. T. (1995). Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. New York: Cambridge University Press. Forman, R. T. T. (1999). Horizontal processes, roads, suburbs, societal objectives, and landscape ecology. In J. M. Klopatek and R. H. Gardner (eds.), Landscape Ecological Analysis: Issues and Applications. New York: Springer-Verlag, 35--53. Forman, R. T. T. (2002a). Envisioning a land mosaic where both nature and people thrive. In Jardines insurgentes: Arquitectura del paisaje en Europa 1996--2000. Barcelona: Edicion Fundacion Caja de Arquitectos, 34--8 and 48--57. Forman, R. T. T. (2002b). The missing catalyst: design and planning with ecology roots. In B. R. Johnson and K. Hill (eds.), Ecology and Design: Frameworks for Learning. Washington, DC: Island Press, 85--109. Forman, R. T. T. (2004a). Mosaico territorial para la region metropolitana de Barcelona. Barcelona: Editorial Gustavo Gili. Forman, R. T. T. (2004b). Road ecology’s promise: what’s around the bend? Environment, 46, 8--21. Forman, R. T. T. (2005). Roadside redesigns -- woody and variegated -- to help sustain nature and people, Harvard Design Magazine, Fall 2005/Winter 2006, 35--41. Forman, R. T. T. (2006). Good and bad places for roads: effects of varying road and natural patterns on habitat loss, degradation, and fragmentation. In Proceedings

359

360

References of the 2005 International Conference on Ecology and Transportation. Raleigh, USA: Center for Transportation and the Environment, North Carolina State University, 164--74. Forman, R. T. T. and Alexander, L. E. (1998). Roads and their major ecological effects. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 29, 207--31. Forman, R. T. T. and Collinge, S. K. (1996). The ‘‘spatial solution” to conserving biodiversity in landscapes and regions. In R. M. DeGraaf and R. I. Miller (eds.), Conservation of Faunal Diversity in Forested Landscapes. London: Chapman & Hall, 537--68. Forman, R. T. T. and Deblinger, R. D. (2000). The ecological road-effect zone of a Massachusetts (USA) suburban highway. Conservation Biology, 14, 36--46. Forman, R. T. T. and Godron, M. (1981). Patches and structural components for a landscape ecology. BioScience, 31, 733--40. Forman, R. T. T. and Godron, M. (1986). Landscape Ecology. New York: John Wiley. Forman, R. T. T. and Hersperger, A. M. (1997). Ecologia del paessaggio e pianiﬁcazione: una potente combinazione. (Landscape ecology and planning: a powerful combination). Urbanistica, 108, 61--6. Forman, R. T. T. and Mellinger, A. D. (2000). Road networks and forest spatial patterns: comparing cutting-sequence models for forestry and conservation. In J. L. Craig, N. Mitchell, and D. A. Saunders (eds.), Nature Conservation 5: Conservation in Production Environments: Managing the Matrix. Chipping Norton, Australia: Surrey Beatty, 71--80. Forman, R. T. T., Reeve, P., Beyer, H., et al. (2004). Open Space and Recreation Plan 2004: Concord, Massachusetts. Concord, MA: Natural Resources Commission. Forman, R. T. T., Reineking, B., and Hersperger, A. M. (2002). Road trafﬁc and nearby grassland bird patterns in a suburbanizing landscape. Environmental Management, 29, 782--800. Forman, R. T. T., Sperling, D., Bissonette, J. A., et al. (2003). Road Ecology: Science and Solutions. Washington, DC: Island Press. Fortin, M.-J. (1999). Spatial statistics in landscape ecology. In J. M. Klopatek and R. H. Gardner (eds.), Landscape Ecological Analysis: Issues and Applications. New York: Springer, 253--79. Foster, D. R. and Aber, J. D. (2004). Forests in Time: The Environmental Consequences of 1000 Years of Change in New England. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Foster, D. R. and Boose, E. (1992). Patterns of forest damage resulting from catastrophic wind in Central New England, USA. Journal of Ecology, 80, 79--99. France, R. L. (ed.) (2002). Handbook of Water-Sensitive Planning and Design. Boca Raton FL: Lewis Publishers. France, R. L. (2003). Wetland Design: Principles and Practices for Landscape Architects and Land-use Planners. New York: Norton. Franklin, J. F. and Forman, R. T. T. (1987). Creating landscape patterns by forest cutting: ecological consequences and principles. Landscape Ecology, 1, 5--18. Frazer, L. (2005). Paving paradise: the peril of impervious surfaces. Environmental Health Perspectives, 113 (7).

References Freemark, K., Bert, D., and Villard, M.-A. (2002). Patch-, landscape- and regional-scale effects on biota. In K. J. Gutzwiller (ed.), Applying Landscape Ecology in Biological Conservation. New York: Springer, 58--83. Friedmann, J. (1973). Retracking America. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday. Frumkin, H., Frank, L., and Jackson, R. (2004). Urban Sprawl and Public Health: Designing, Planning, and Building for Healthy Communities. Washington, DC: Island Press. Fuchs, R. J., Brennan, E., Chamie, J., Lo, F. C., and Uitto, J. I. (eds.) (1994). Mega-City Growth and the Future. Tokyo: The United Nations University. Galatas, R. (2004). The Woodlands: The Inside Story of Creating a Better Hometown. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute. Garde, A. (2004). New urbanism as sustainable growth? A supply side story and its implications for public policy. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 24, 154--70. Garreau, J. (1991). Edge City: Life on the New Frontier. New York: Doubleday. Geddes, P. (1915). Cities in Evolution. London: Williams and Norgate. Germaine, S. S., Rosenstock, S. S., Schweinsburg, R. E., and Richardson, W. S. (1998). Relationships among breeding birds, habitat and residential development in greater Tucson, Arizona. Ecological Applications, 8, 680--91. Getting to Smart Growth. (2002). Washington, DC: Smart Growth Network. Getting to Smart Growth II. (2003). Washington, DC: Smart Growth Network. Ghassemi, F. (2006). Inter-Basin Water Transfer: Case Studies from Australia, United States, Canada, China and India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gibert, J., Danielopol, D. L., and Stanford, J. A. (eds.) (1994). Groundwater Ecology. San Diego: Academic Press. Gilbert, O. (1991). The Ecology of Urban Habitats. London: Chapman & Hall. Gingrich, S. E. and Diamond, M. L. (2001). Atmospherically derived organic surface ﬁlms along an urban-rural gradient. Environmental Science and Technology, 35, 4031--7. Girot, C. (2004). Eulogy of the void: the lost power of Berlin landscapes after the wall. DISP (ETH Zurich), 156, 35--9. Gladwell, M. (2000). The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference, London: Littlebrown. Godde, M., Richarz, N., and Walter, B. (1995). Habitat conservation and development in the city of Dusseldorf (Germany). In H. Sukopp, M. Numata, and A. Huber (eds.), Urban Ecology as the Basis of Urban Planning. Amsterdam: SPB Academic Publishing, 163--71. Godron, M. and Forman, R. T. T. (1983). Landscape modiﬁcation and changing ecological characteristics. In H. A. Mooney and M. Godron (eds.), Disturbance and Ecosystems: Components of Response. New York: Springer-Verlag, 12--28. Goldstein, E. L., Gross, M., and DeGraaf, R. M. (1981). Explorations in bird-land geometry. Urban Ecology, 5, 113--24. Gomez-Ibanez, J. A. (1999). Essays in Transportation Economics and Policy: A Handbook in Honor of John R. Meyer. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

361

362

References Goodman, S. W. (1996). Ecosystem management at the Department of Defense. Ecological Applications, 6, 706--7. Gordon, P. and Richardson, H. (1997). Are compact cities a desirable planning goal? Journal of the American Planning Association, 63, 95--106. Gore, A. (2006). An Inconvenient Truth. New York: Rodale. Green, B. and Vos, W. (eds.) (2001). Threatened Landscapes: Conserving Cultural Environments. London: Spon Press. Greenberg, J. (2002). A Natural History of the Chicago Region. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Grimm, N. B., Baker, L. J., and Hope, D. (2003). An ecosystem approach to understanding cities: familiar foundations and uncharted frontiers. In A. R. Berkowitz and K. S. Hollweg (eds.), Understanding Urban Ecosystems: A New Frontier for Science and Education. New York: Springer, 95--114. Groffman, P. M., Bain, D. J., Band, L. E., et al. (2003). Down by the riverside: urban riparian ecology. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 1, 315--21. Groom, M., Meffe, G. K., Carroll, R., and Contributors. (2006). Principles of Conservation Biology. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates. Gross, G. (2002). The exploration of boundary layer phenomena using a nonhydrostatic mesoscale model. Meteorologische Zeitschrift, 11, 701--10. Grove, A. T. and Rackham, O. (2001). The Nature of Mediterranean Europe: An Ecological History. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Groves, C. R., Jensen, D. B., et al. (2002). Planning for biodiversity conservation: putting conservation science into practice, BioScience, 52, 499--512. Gu, C. and Kesteloot, C. (1998). Beijing’s socio-spatial structure in transition. In J. Breuste, H. Feldmann, and O. Ulhmann (eds.), Urban Ecology. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 288--93. Gutzwiller, K. J. (ed.) (2002). Applying Landscape Ecology in Biological Conservation. New York: Springer. Haber, W. (1993). Okologische Grundlagen des Umweltschutres. Bonn, Germany: Economica Verlag. Haggett, P., Cliff, A. D., and Frey, A. (1977). Locational Analysis in Human Geography. New York: John Wiley. Hahs, A. K. and McDonnell, M. J. (2007). Selecting independent measures to quantify Melbourne’s urban-rural gradient. Landscape and Urban Planning (in press). Hall, P. G. (2002). Cities of Tomorrow: An Intellectual History of Urban Planning and Design in the Twentieth Century. Oxford: Blackwell. Handy, S. (1992). Regional versus local accessibility: neo-traditional development and its implications for non-work travel. Built Environment, 18, 253--67. Handy, S. (2005). Critical Assessment of the Literature on the Relationships Among Transportation, Land Use, and Physical Activity. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board and Institute of Medicine, TRB Special Report 282. Hansen, A. J. (2002). Ecological causes and consequences of demographic change in the new West. BioScience, 52, 151--62.

References Hansen, A. J. and Rotella, J. J. (2001). Nature reserves and land use: implications of the ‘‘place” principle. In V. H. Dale and R. A. Haeuber (eds.), Applying Ecological Principles to Land Management. New York: Springer, 54--72. Hanski, I. A. and Gilpin, M. E. (eds.) (1997). Metapopulation Biology: Ecology, Genetics, and Evolution. San Diego: Academic Press. Hara, Y., Takeuchi, K., and Okubo, S. (2005). Urbanization linked with past agricultural landuse patterns in the urban fringe of a deltaic Asian mega-city: a case study in Bangkok. Landscape and Urban Planning, 73, 16--28. Hardin, G. and Baden, J. (1977). Managing the Commons. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman. Harris, L. (1984). The Fragmented Forest: Island Biography and the Preservation of Biotic Diversity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Harris, L. D., Hoctor, T. S., and Gergel, S. E. (1996). Landscape processes and their signiﬁcance to biodiversity conservation. In O. Rhodes, Jr., R. Chesser, and M. Smith (eds.), Population Dynamics in Ecological Space and Time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 319--47. Heisler, G. M., et al. (1994). Investigation of the influence of Chicago’s urban forests on wind and air temperature within residential neighborhoods. In Chicago’s Urban Forest Ecosystem: Results of the Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project. Radnor, PA: General Technical Report NE-186, USDA Forest Service, 19--40. Hersperger, A. M. (2006). Spatial adjacencies and interactions: neighborhood mosaics for landscape ecology planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 77, 227--39. Hersperger, A. M. and Forman, R. T. T. (2003). Adjacency arrangement effects on plant diversity and composition in woodland patches. Oikos, 101, 279--90. Hien, W. N., Yok, T. P., and Yu, C. (2007). Study of the thermal performance of extensive rooftop greenery systems in the tropical climate. Building and Environment, 42, 25--54. Hilty, J. A., Lidicker, W. Z., Jr., and Merenlender, A. M. (2006). Corridor Ecology: The Science and Practice of Linking Landscapes for Biodiversity Conservation. Washington, DC: Island Press. Hobbs, N. T. and Theobold, D. M. (2001). Effects of land-use change on wildlife habitat: applying ecological principles and guidelines in the Western United States. In V. H. Dale and R. A. Haeuber (eds.), Applying Ecological Principles to Land Management. New York: Springer, 37--53. Hobbs, R. J. (1995). Landscape ecology. Encyclopedia of Environmental Biology, 2, 417--28. Hobbs, R. J. and Miller, J. R. (2002). Conservation where people live and work. Conservation Biology, 16, 330--7. Hodge, G. (1998). Planning Canadian Communities -- An Introduction to the Principles, Practice, and Participants. Toronto: International Thomson Publishing. Hong, S.-K., Song, I-J., Kim, H. O., and Lee, E. K. (2003). Landscape pattern and its effect on ecosystem functions in Seoul Metropolitan area: urban ecology on distribution of the naturalized plant species. Journal of Environmental Science, 15, 199--204.

363

364

References Houck, M. C. and Cody, M. J. (eds.) (2000). Wild in the City: A Guide to Portland’s Natural Areas. Portland, OR: Oregon Historical Society Press. Hough, M. (2004). Cities and Natural Process: A Basis for Sustainability. New York: Routledge. Houghton, J. T., Ding, Y., Griggs, D. J., et al. (eds.) (2001). Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the International Panel on Climate Change. Houston, P. (2005). Re-valuing the fringe: some ﬁndings on the value of agricultural production in Australia’s peri-urban regions. Geographical Research, 43, 209--23. Howarth, R. B. and Norgaard, R. B. (1992). Environmental valuation under sustainable development. American Economic Review, 82, 473--77. Howe, J. (2002). Planning for urban food: the experience of two UK cities. Planning Practice and Research, 17, 125--44. Hulse, D., Gregory, S., and Baker, J., (eds.) (2002). Willamette River Basin Planning Atlas: Trajectories of Environmental and Ecological Change. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University Press. Ichinose, T., Shimodozono, K., and Hanaki, K. (1999). Impact of anthropogenic heat on urban climate in Tokyo. Atmospheric Environment, 33, 3897--909. Im, S.-B. (1992). Skyline conservation and management in rapidly growing cities and regions: successes and failures in Korea. International Conference on Landscape Planning and Environmental Conservation Proceedings. Tokyo: University of Tokyo. Ingegnoli, V. (2002). Landscape Ecology: A Widening Foundation. New York: Springer. Irazabal, C. (2005). City Making and Urban Governance in the Americas: Curitiba and Portland. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate. Ishikawa, M. (2001). City and Green Space. (In Japanese), Tokyo: Iwanami Syoten Ltd. Iuell, B. et al. (2003). Habitat Fragmentation Due to Transportation Infrastructure: Wildlife and Traffic: A European Handbook for Identifying Conflicts and Designing Solutions. Brussels: KNNV Publishers, COST 341. Jackson, J. B. (1994). A Sense of Place, A Sense of Time. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Jacobi, P., Drescher, A. W., and Amend, J. (2000). Urban Agriculture: Justification and Planning Guidelines. Canada: City Farmer. Jacobs, J. (1992). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Vintage Books. Jared, O. (2004). Hazardous Metropolis: Flooding and Urban Ecology in Los Angeles. Berkeley: University of California Press. Jenerette, D. G. and Wu, J. (2001). Analysis and simulation of land-use change in the Central Arizona-Phoenix Region. Landscape Ecology, 16, 611--26. Jenks, M., Burton, E., and Williams, K. (1996). The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form? London: E&FN Spon. Jim, C. Y. and Chen, S. S. (2003). Comprehensive greenspace planning based on landscape ecology principles in compact Nanjing City, China. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65, 95--116.

References Johnson, B. R. and Hill, K. (eds.) (2002). Ecology and Design: Frameworks for Learning. Washington, DC: Island Press. Jones, C. I. (2002). Introduction to Economic Growth. New York: Norton. Jongman, R. H. G. and Pungetti, G. (eds.) (2004). Ecological Networks and Greenways: Concept, Design, Implementation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kahn, M. E. (2006). Green Cities: Urban Growth and the Environment. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Kalff, J. (2002). Limnology: Inland Water Ecosystems. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Kaplan, R., Kaplan, S., and Ryan, R. L. (1998). With People in Mind: Design and Management of Everyday Nature. Washington, DC: Island Press. Kareiva, P. Watts, S., McDonald, R. I., and Boucher, T. (2007). Domesticated nature: shaping landscapes and ecosystems for human welfare. Science, 316, 1866--9. Karl, T. L. (1997). The Paradox of Plenty: Oil Booms and Petro-States. Berkeley: University of California Press. Karr, J. R. (2002). What from ecology is relevant to design and planning? In B. R. Johnson and K. Hill (eds.), Ecology and Design: Frameworks for Learning. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 133--72. Kasser, T. (2003). The High Price of Materialism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Katz, P. (1994). The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community. New York: McGraw-Hill. Keddy, P. A. (2000). Wetland Ecology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Keiter, R. B. and Boyce, M. S. (eds.) (1991). The Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem: Redefining America’s Wilderness Heritage. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Kellert, S. R. (2005). Building for Life: Designing and Understanding the Human--Nature Connection. Washington, DC: Island Press. Kellert, S., Heerwagen, J., and Mador, M. (eds.). (2007). Biophilic Design: Theory, Science, Practice. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Kellert, S. R. and Wilson, E. O. (eds.) (1993). The Biophilia Hypothesis. Washington, DC: Island Press. Kirkwood, N. (ed.) (2001). Manufactured Sites: Rethinking the Post-Industrial Landscape. New York: Spon Press. Klopatek, J. M. and Gardner, R. H. (eds.) (1999). Landscape Ecological Analysis: Issues and Applications. New York: Springer. Klotz, S. (1990). Species/area and species/inhabitants relations in European cities. In H. Sukopp and S. Hejny (eds.), Urban Ecology: Plants and Plant Communities in Urban Environments. The Hague, Netherlands: SPB Academic Publishing, 99--103. Knaapen, J. P., Scheffer, M., and Harms, B. (1992). Estimating habitat isolation in landscape planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 23, 1--16. Knight, R. L. and Gutzwiller, K. J. (1995). Wildlife and Recreationists: Coexistence Through Management and Research. Washington, DC: Island Press. Konijnendijk C. C., Nilsson, K., Randrup, T. B., and Schipperijn, J. (eds.) (2005). Urban Forests and Trees: A Reference Book. Berlin: Springer.

365

366

References Kowarik, I. and Korner, S. (eds.) (2005). Wild Urban Woodlands: New Perspectives for Urban Forestry. New York: Springer. Kowarik, I. and Langer, A. (2005). Natur-Park Sudgelande: linking conservation and recreation in an abandoned railyard in Berlin. In I. Kowarik and S. Korner (eds.), Wild Urban Woodlands: New Perspectives for Urban Forestry. New York: Springer, 287--99. Kraenzel, C. F. (1947). Principles of regional planning: as applied to the Northwest. Social Forces, 25, 373--84. Krebs, C. J. (1994). Ecology: The Experimental Analysis of Distribution and Abundance. New York: HarperCollins. Kreimer, A., Arnold, M., and Carlin, A. (2003). Building Safer Cities: The Future of Disaster Risk. Washington, DC: World Bank. Kremen, C. and Ostfeld, R. S. (2005). A call to ecologists: measuring, analyzing, and managing ecosystem services. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment, 3, 540--8. Kuan, S. and Rowe, P. (2004). Shanghai: Architecture and Urbanism for Modern China. New York: Prestel. Kuhbler, A. (2000). Grosser Tiergarten. Berlin: L&H Verlag. Lagro, J. A. (2001). Site Analysis: Linking Program and Concept in Land Planning and Design. New York: John Wiley. Lal, R. (ed.) (1994). Soil Erosion: Research Methods. Ankeny, IA: Soil and Water Conservation Society. Landsberg, H. E. (1981). The Urban Climate. New York: Academic Press. Laurance, W. F., Vasconcelos, H. L., and Lovejoy, T. L. (2000). Forest loss and fragmentation in the Amazon: implications for wildlife conservation. Oryx, 34, 31--45. Lawrence, D. (2004). Erosion of tree diversity during 200 years of shifting cultivation in Bornean rainforest. Ecological Applications, 14, 1855--69. Layard, R. (2005). Happiness: Lessons from a New Science. New York: Penguin. Layton, R. (1989). Uluru: An Aboriginal History of Ayers Rock. Canberra, Australia: Aboriginal Studies Press. Lee, D. G., Kim, E. Y., and Oh, K. S. (2005). Conservation value assessment by considering patch size, connectivity, and edge. Journal of Korean Environmental Research and Revegetation Technology, 8(5), 56--68. LeGates, R. T. and Stout, F. (eds.) (2003). The City Reader. London: Routledge. Leitao, A. B., Miller, J., Ahern, J., and McGarigal, K. (2006). Measuring Landscapes: A Planner’s Handbook. Washington, DC: Island Press. Lenzen, M. and Murray, S. A. (2001). A modiﬁed ecological footprint method and its application to Australia. Ecological Economics, 37, 229--56. Leopold, A. (1933). The conservation ethic. Journal of Forestry, 31(6), 634--43. Leopold, A. (1944). Cheat takes over. The Land, 1, 310--13. Leslie, M., Meffe, G. K., Hardesty, J. I., and Adams, D. L. (1996). Conserving Biodiversity on Military Lands: A Handbook for Natural Resources Managers. Arlington, VA: The Nature Conservancy. Li, H., Franklin, J. F., Swanson, F. J., and Spies, T. A. (1993). Developing alternative forest cutting patterns: a simulation approach. Landscape Ecology, 8, 63--75.

References Liddle, M. (1997). Recreation Ecology: The Ecological Impact of Outdoor Recreation and Ecotourism. London: Chapman & Hall. Lindenmayer, D. and Burgman, M. (2005). Practical Conservation Biology. Collingwood, Australia: CSIRO Publishing. Lindenmayer, D. B. and Fischer, J. (2006). Habitat Fragmentation and Landscape Change: An Ecological and Conservation Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press. Lindenmayer, D. and Franklin, J. F. (2002). Conserving Forest Biodiversity: A Comprehensive Multiscaled Approach. Washington, DC: Island Press. Listhaug, O. (2005). Oil wealth dissatisfaction and political trust in Norway: a resource curse? West European Politics, 28, 834--51. Liu, J. and Taylor, W. W. (eds). Integrating Landscape Ecology into Natural Resource Management. New York: Cambridge University Press. Lopez, H. (2003). Sprawl in the 1990s: measurement, distribution and trends, Urban Affairs Review, 38, 325--55. Losada, H., Martinez, H., Vieyra, J., et al. (1998). Urban agriculture in the metropolitan zone of Mexico City: changes over time in urban, suburban, and peri-urban areas. Environment and Urbanization, 10, 37--54. Losch, A. (1954). The Economics of Location. (Translated version). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Lovelock, J. (2000). Gaia: The Practical Science of Planetary Medicine. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Luck, G. W., Ricketts, T. H., Daily, G. C., and Imhoff, M. (2004). Alleviating spatial conﬂict between people and biodiversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA), 101, 182--6. Luck, M., Jenerette, G. D., Wu, J., and Grimm, N. B. (2001). The urban funnel model and spatially heterogeneous ecological footprint. Ecosystems, 4, 782--96. Luck, M. and Wu, J. (2002). A gradient analysis of urban landscape pattern: a case study from the Phoenix metropolitan region, Arizona, USA. Landscape Ecology, 17, 327. Ludwig, J., Tongway, D., Freudenberger, D., et al. (1997). Landscape Ecology: Function and Management: Principles from Australia’s Rangelands. Collingwood, Victoria, Australia: CSIRO Publishing. Lund, H. (2003). Testing the claims of new urbanism: local access, pedestrian travel and neighboring. Journal of the American Planning Association, 69, 414--29. Lynch, K. (1981). A Theory of Good City Form. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Lynch, K. and Hack, G. (1996). Site Planning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Macionis, J. J. and Parillo, V. N. (2001). Cities and Urban Life. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. MacKaye, B. (1940). Regional planning and ecology. Ecological Monographs 10, 349--53.. Magnusson, W. E. (2004). Ecoregion as a pragmatic tool. Conservation Biology, 18, 4--5. Main, H. and Williams, S. W. (1994). Environment and Housing in Third World Cities. New York: John Wiley. Maki, S., Kalliola, R., and Vuorinen, K. (2001). Road construction in the Peruvian Amazon: process, causes and consequences. Environmental Conservation, 28, 199--214.

367

368

References Margat, J. (1994). Groundwater operations and management. In J. Gibert, D. L. Danielopol, and J. A. Stanford (eds.), Groundwater Ecology. San Diego: Academic Press, 505--22. Marsh, W. M. (2005). Landscape Planning: Environmental Applications. New York: John Wiley. Masud-Ul-Hasan, T. K. (c. 1965). Hand Book of Important Places in West Pakistan. Published by Pakistan Social Service Foundation, Karachi. Mata, R. and Tarroja, A. (Coordinadores) (2006). El paisaje y la gestion del territorio: Criterios paisajisticos en la ordenacion del territorio y el urbanismo. Barcelona: Diputacio de Barcelona. Matlack, G. R. (1993). Sociological edge effects: spatial distribution of human impact in suburban forest fragments. Environmental Management, 17, 829--35. Mauerer, U., Peschel, T., and Schmitz, S. (2000). The ﬂora of selected urban land-use types in Berlin and Potsdam with regard to nature conservation in cities. Landscape and Urban Planning, 46, 209--15. Mayor Farguell, X., Quintana Gozalo, V., and Belmonte Zamora, R. (2005). Aproximacio a la petjada ecologica de Catalunya (An Approximation to the Ecological Footprint of Catalonia). Barcelona: Consell Assessor per al Desenvolupament Sostenible, Generalitat de Catalunya. McCarthy, J. J., Canziani, O. F., Leary, N. A., Dokken, D. J., and White, K. S. (eds.) (2001). Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Contribution of Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. McCullough, D. R. (ed.) (1996). Metapopulations and Wildlife Conservation. Washington, DC: Island Press. McDonald, R. I. and Urban, D. L. (2006). Forest edges and forest composition in the North Carolina Piedmont. Biological Invasions, 8, 1049--60. McDonnell, M. J., Pickett, S. T. A., et al. (1997). Ecosystem processes along an urban-to-rural gradient. Urban Ecosystems, 1, 21--36. McGarigal, K. and Cushman, S. A. (2005). The gradient concept of landscape structure. In J. A. Wiens and M. R. Moss (eds.), Issues and Perspectives in Landscape Ecology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 112--19. McGrath, B. and Thaitakoo, D. (2005). Tasting the periphery: Bangkok’s agri- and aquacultural fringe. Architectural Design, 75 (June), 43--51. McHarg, I. L. (1969). Design with Nature, Garden City. New York: Doubleday Natural History Press. McIntyre. S. and Hobbs, R. (1999). A framework for conceptualizing human effects on landscapes and its relevance to management and research models. Conservation Biology, 13, 1282--92. McMichael, A. (2000). The urban environment and health in a world of increasing globalization: issues for developing countries. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 78, 1117--26.

References McNeill, J. R. (2000). Something New Under the Sun: An Environmental History of the Twentieth-Century World. New York: Norton. Meyer, W. B. and Turner, B. L. (1994). Changes in Land Use and Land Cover: A Global Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: Current State and Trends. (2005). Washington, DC: Island Press. Miller, C. K. and Gershman, M. D. (1998). Outdoor recreation and boundaries: opportunities and challenges. In R. L. Knight and P. B. Landres (eds.), Stewardship Across Boundaries, Washington, DC: Island Press, 141--58. Miller, N. P. (2005). Addressing the noise from US transportation systems: measures and countermeasures, TR News, 240, 4--16. Milne, B. T. (1991a). Lessons from applying fractal models to landscape patterns. In M. G. Turner and R. H. Gardner (eds.), Quantitative Methods in Landscape Ecology. New York: Springer, 199--238. Milne, B. T. (1991b). The utility of fractal geometry in landscape design. Landscape and Urban Planning, 21, 81--90. Mitsch, W. J. and Gosselink, J. G. (2000). Wetlands. New York: John Wiley. Mladenoff, D. J. (2005). The promise of landscape modeling: successes, failures, and evolution. In J. A. Wiens and M. R. Moss (eds.), Issues and Perspectives in Landscape Ecology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 90--100. Moore, S. A. (2007). Alternative Routes to the Sustainable City: Austin, Curitiba, and Frankfurt. Lanham, MA: Rowman and Littleﬁeld. Moran, J. M. and Morgan, M. D. (1994). Meteorology: The Atmosphere and the Science of Weather. New York: Macmillan. Moreira, F., Rego, F. C., and Ferreira, P. C. (2001). Temporal (1958--1995) patterns of change in a cultural landscape of northwestern Portugal: implications for ﬁre occurrence. Landscape Ecology, 16, 557--67. Morgan, A. E. (1971). Dams and Other Disasters. Boston, MA: Porter Sargent. Morgan, G. T. and King, J. O. (1987). The Woodlands: New Community Development, 1964--1983. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press. Morin, P. J. (1999). Community Ecology. Malden, MA: Blackwell Science. Mortberg, U. M. (2001). Resident bird species in urban forest remnants: landscape and habitat perspectives. Landscape Ecology, 16, 193--203. Mougeot, L. J. (ed.) (2005). Agropolis: The Social, Political and Environmental Dimensions of Urban Agriculture. London: Earthscan-IDRC. Muehlenbach, V. (1979). Contributions to the synanthropic (adventive) ﬂora of the railroads in St. Louis, Missouri, USA. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden, 66, 1--108. Munton, R. (1983). London’s Greenbelt: Containment in Practice. London: Allen and Unwin. Musacchio, L. R. and Wu, J. (2004). Collaborative landscape-scale ecological research: emerging trends in urban and regional ecology. Urban Ecosystems, 7, 175--8. Nash, R. (1982). Wilderness and the American Mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

369

370

References Nassauer, J. I. (ed.) (1997). Placing Nature: Culture and Landscape Ecology. Washington, DC: Island Press. Nassauer, J. I. (2005). Using cultural knowledge to make new landscape patterns. In J. A. Wiens and M. R. Moss (eds.), Issues and Perspectives in Landscape Ecology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 274--80. National Research Council. (1997). Toward a Sustainable Future: Addressing the Long-Term Effects of Motor Vehicle Transportation on Climate and Ecology. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (1999). Governance and Opportunity in Metropolitan America. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (2005). Valuing Ecosystem Services: Toward Better Environmental Decision-Making. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Nel.lo, O. (ed.) (2003). Aqui, no!: Els conflictes territorials a Catalunya. Barcelona: Editorial Empuries. Nelson, A. (2006). Cold War Ecology: Forests, Farms, and People in the East German Landscape, 1945--1989. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press. Nilon, C. H. and Pais, R. C. (1997). Terrestrial vertebrates in urban ecosystems: developing hypothesis for Gwynns Falls watershed in Baltimore, Maryland. Urban Ecosystems, 1, 247--57. Norberg-Schulz, C. (1980). Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture. London: Academy Editions. Nordhaus, W. D. (1992). Lethal Model 2: The limits to growth revisited. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2, 1--59. Noss, R. F. (2003). A checklist for wildlands network designs. Conservation Biology, 17, 1720--75. Noss, R. F. and Cooperider, A. Y. (1994). Saving Nature’s Legacy: Protecting and Restoring Biodiversity. Washington, DC: Island Press. Nowak, D. (1994). Air pollution removal by Chicago’s urban forest. In Chicago’s Urban Forest Ecosystem: Results of the Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project, Radnor. Pennsylvania: USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report NE-186, p. 63. Odum, E. P. and Barrett, G. W. (2005). Fundamentals of Ecology. Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole. Odum, E. P. and Turner, M. G. (1990). The Georgia landscape: a changing resource. In I. S. Zonneveld and R. T. T. Forman (eds.), Changing Landscapes: An Ecological Perspective. New York: Springer-Verlag, 137--64. Odum, H. T. (1973). Energy, ecology, and economics. Ambio, 2(6), 220--7. Odum, H. T. and Odum, E. C. (1981). Energy Basis for Man and Nature. New York: McGraw-Hill. Odum, W. E. (1982). Environmental degradation and the tyranny of small decisions. BioScience, 32, 728--9. Ofﬁce of Management and Budget. (2000). Standards for Defining Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas; Notice. Part IX. National Archives and Records Administration, USA, Federal Register. 65, 82228--38. Oke, T. R. (1987). Boundary Layer Climates. London: Methuen and Co.

References Oliveira, P. S. and Marquis, R. J. (eds.) (2002). The Cerrados of Brazil: Ecology and Natural History of a Neotropical Savanna. New York: Columbia University Press. Olson, D. M., et al. (2001). Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on earth. BioScience, 51, 933--38. Omernik, J. M. (1987). Ecoregions of the conterminous United States. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 77, 118--25. O’Neill, R. V., De Angelis, D. L., Waide, J. B., and Allen, T. F. H. (1986). A Hierarchical Concept of Ecosystems. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Opdam, P., and Schotman, A. (1987). Small woods in rural landscape as habitat islands for woodland birds. Acta Oecologia/Oecologia Generalis, 8, 269--74. Opdam, P., Foppen, R. and Vos, C. (2002). Bridging the gap between ecology and spatial planning in landscape ecology. Landscape Ecology, 16, 767--79. Opdam, P., van Apeldoorn, R., Schotman, A., and Kalkhoven, J. (1992). Population responses to landscape fragmentation. In C. C. Vos and P. Opdam (eds.), Landscape Ecology of a Stressed Environment. London: Chapman & Hall, 147--71. Orr, D. W. (2002). The Nature of Design: Ecology, Culture, and Human Intention. New York: Oxford University Press. Orwin, C. S. and Orwin, C. S. (1967). The Open Fields. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Osband, G. J. (1984). Managing Urban Forests. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Graduate School of Design, Penny White Student Project. Owen, J. (1991). The Ecology of a Garden: The First Fifteen Years. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ozawa, C. P. (2004). The Portland Edge: Challenges and Successes in Growing Communities. Washington, DC: Island Press. Pandell, R., Martin, J., and Fulton, W. (2002). Holding the Line: Urban Containment in the United States. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy. Parc de Collserola: Llibre Guia. (1997). Barcelona: Patronat Metropolita del Parc de Collserola. Park, C.-R. and Lee, W.-S. (2000). Relationship between species composition and area in breeding birds of urban woods in Seoul, Korea. Landscape and Urban Planning, 51, 29--36. Parsons, K. C. and Schuyler, D. (2000). From Garden City to Greencity: The Legacy of Ebenezer Howard. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Parsons, K. C., Brown, S. C., Erwin, R. M., et al. (2002). Waterbirds: Managing Wetlands for Waterbirds: Integrated Approaches. Lawrence, KS, USA: Publication of the Waterbird Society. Patterson, M. (2002). Ecological production based pricing of biosphere processes. Ecological Economics, 41, 457--78. Paul, M. J. and Meyer, J. L. (2001). Streams in an urban landscape. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 32, 333--65. Pauleit, S., Jones, N., Nyhuus, S., Pirnat, J., and Salbitano, F. (2005). Urban forest resources in European cities. In C. C. Konijnendijk, K. Nilsson, T. B. Randrup,

371

372

References and J. Schipperijn (eds.), Urban Forests and Trees: A Reference Book. Springer, Berlin, 51--80. Pearce, D. and Ulph, D. (1999). A social discount rate for the United Kingdom. In D. Pearce (ed.), Economics and Environment: Essays on Ecological Economics and Sustainable Development. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Pearce, D. W. and Atkinson, G. D. (1993). Capital theory and the measurement of sustainable development: an indicator of ‘‘weak” sustainability. Ecological Economics, 8, 103--8. Peck, S. and Kuhn, M. (2003). Design Guidelines for Green Roofs. Ottawa: Ontario Association of Architects. Pegel, H. (2007). Farming for nature in the Fehntjer Tief: a contribution to the sustainable development of an East Frisian cultural landscape. In B. Pedroli, A. von Doom, G. de Blust, et al. (eds.), Europe’s Living Landscapes: Essays Exploring Our Identity in the Countryside. Wageningen, the Netherlands: KNNV Publishing, 225--38. Peiser, R. (2001). Decomposing urban sprawl. Town Planning Review, 72, 275--98. Perlman, D. L. and Milder, J. C. (2005). Practical Ecology for Planners, Developers, and Citizens. Washington, DC: Island Press. Perlman, J. E. (1976). The Myth of Marginality: Urban Poverty and Politics in Rio de Janeiro. Berkeley: University of California Press. Perman, R., Ma, Y., McGilvray, J., and Common, M. (2003). Natural Resource and Environmental Economics. Harlow, UK: Pearson Addison-Wesley. Perrings, C. (1991). Reserved rationality and the precautionary principle: technological change, time and uncertainty in environmental decision making. In R. Costanza (ed.), Ecological Economics: The Science and Management of Sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press, 153--66. Peterken, G. F. (1996). Natural Woodland: Ecology and Conservation in Northern Temperate Regions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Peterken, G. F., Ausherman, D., Buchenau, M., and Forman, R. T. T. (1992). Old-growth conservation within British upland conifer plantations. Forestry, 65, 127--44. Pezzey, J. C. V. (2004). Sustainability policy and environmental policy. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 106, 339--59. Pezzey, J. C. V., Hanley, N., Turner, K., and Tinch, D. (2006). Comparing augmented sustainability measures for Scotland: Is there a mismatch? Ecological Economics, 57, 60--74. Pezzoli, K. (1998). Human Settlements and Planning for Ecological Sustainability. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Pickett, S. T. A. (2006). Advancing urban ecology studies: frameworks, concepts, and results from the Baltimore Ecosystem Study. Austral Ecology, 31, 114--25. Pickett, S. T. A., Cadenasso, M. L., Grove, J. M., et al. (2001). Urban ecological systems: linking terrestrial ecological, physical, and socioeconomic components of metropolitan areas. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 32, 127--57. Pickett, S. T. A. and White, P. S. (eds.) (1985). The Ecology of Natural Disturbance and Patch Dynamics. New York: Academic Press.

References Pilkey, O. H. and Dixon, K. L. (1996). The Corps and the Shore. Washington, DC: Island Press. Pinchot, G. (1967). The Fight for Conservation. Seattle. WA: University of Washington Press. Pinelands Commission. (1980a). Comprehensive Management Plan for the Pinelands National Reserve (National Parks and Recreation Act, 1978) and Pinelands Area (New Jersey Pinelands Protection Act, 1979). New Lisbon, NJ: State of New Jersey. Pinelands Commission. (1980b). New Jersey Pineland Comprehensive Management Plan. New Lisbon, NJ: Pinelands Commission. Pino, J., Roda, F., Ribas, J., and Pons, X. (2000). Landscape structure and bird species richness: implications for conservation in rural areas between natural parks. Landscape and Urban Planning, 49, 35--48. Platt, R. H. (2004). Land Use and Society: Geography, Law, and Public Policy. Washington, DC: Island Press. Platt, R. H., Rowntree, R. A., and Muick, P. C. (1994). The Ecological City: Preserving and Restoring Urban Biodiversity. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press. Ponting, C. (1991). A Green History of the World. New York: Penguin Books. Pouyat, R. V., McDonnell, M. J., and Pickett, S. T. A. (1997). Litter decomposition and nitrogen mineralization in oak stands along an urban-rural land-use gradient. Urban Ecosystems, 1, 117--31. Prat, N., Munne, A., Sola, C., et al. (2002). La Qualitat Ecologica del Llobregat, El Besos, El Foix i la Tordera: Informe 2000. Barcelona: Diputacio de Barcelona, Estudis de la Qualitat Ecologica dels ruis, Number 10. Primack, R. B. (2004). A Primer of Conservation Biology. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates. Rackham, O. (1980). Ancient Woodland. London: Edward Arnold. Radford, R. (coordinator) (1996). Tom Roberts. Adelaide: Art Gallery of South Australia. Rapoport, E. H. (1993). The process of plant colonization in small settlements and large cities. In M. J. McDonnell and S. T. A. Pickett (eds.), Humans as Components of Ecosystems: The Ecology of Subtle Human Effects and Populated Areas. New York: Springer-Verlag, 190--207. Ravetz, J. (2000). City-Region 2020: Integrated Planning for a Sustainable Environment. London: Earthscan. Ray, D. (1998). Development Economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Rees, W. E. (2003). Understanding urban ecosystems: an ecological economics perspective. In A. R. Berkowitz, C. H. Nilon, and K. S. Hollweg, (eds.), Understanding Urban Ecosystems: A New Frontier for Science and Education. New York: Springer, 115--36. Register, R. (2006). Ecocities: Rebuilding Cities in Balance with Nature. Gabriola Island, British Columbia, Canada: New Society Publishers. Reijnen, R., Foppen, R., and Meeuwsen, H. (1996). The effects of car trafﬁc on the density of breeding birds in Dutch agricultural grasslands. Biological Conservation, 75, 255--60.

373

374

References Reijnen, R., Foppen, R., ter Braak, C., and Thissen, J. (1995). The effects of car trafﬁc on breeding bird populations in woodland. III. Reduction of density in relation to the proximity of main roads. Journal of Applied Ecology, 32, 187--202. Ren, et al. (2003). Urbanization, land use and water quality in Shanghai 1947--1966. Environment International, 29, 649--59. Rich, C. and Longcore, T. (2006). Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting. Washington, DC: Island Press. Ricklefs, R. E. and Miller, G. L. (2000). Ecology. New York: W. H. Freeman. Rieley, J. O. and Page, S. E. (1995). Survey, mapping and evaluation of green space in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. In H. Sukopp, M. Numata, and A. Huber (eds.), Urban Ecology as the Basis of Urban Planning. Amsterdam: SPB Academic Publishing, 173--83. Rieradevall, M. and Cambra, J. (1994). Urban freshwater ecosystems in Barcelona. Verhandlungen Internationale Vereinigung Limnologie, 25, 1369--72. Rigby, K. (2006). (Not) by design: utopian moments in the creation of Canberra. Arena Journal Series, 25/26, 155--77. Rink, D. (2005). Surrogate nature or wilderness? Social perceptions and notions of nature in an urban context. In I. Kowarik and S. Korner (eds.), Wild Urban Woodlands. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 67--80. Robertson, M. M. (2006). Emerging ecosystem service markets: trends in a decade of entrepreneurial wetland banking. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment, 4, 297--302. Robin, L. (1998). Defending the Little Desert: The Rise of Ecological Consciousness in Australia. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press. Robinson, W. H. (1996). Urban Entomology: Insects and Mite Pests in the Human Environment. London: Chapman & Hall. Roda, F., Retana, J., Gracia, C. A., and Bellot J. (1999). Ecology of Mediterranean Evergreen Oak Forests. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. Rogers, P. P., Jalal, K. F., and Boyd, J. A. (2006). An Introduction to Sustainable Development. Cambridge, MA: Published by the Continuing Education Division of Harvard University and the Glen Educational Foundation. Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technical change. Journal of Political Economy, 98, S71--S102. Rosell Pages, C. and Velasco Rivas, J. M. (1999). Manual de prevencio i correccio dels impactes de les infraestructures viaries sobre la fauna. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya, Numero 4, Departament de Medi Ambient. Ross, A. (1999). The Celebration Chronicles: Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Property Value in Disney’s New Town. New York: Ballantine Books. Rowe, P. G. (1991). Making a Middle Landscape. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. Rowe, P. G. (2006). Building Barcelona: A Second Renaixenca. Barcelona: Barcelona Regional and ACTAR. Saley, H., Meredith, D. H., Stelfox, H., and Ealey, D. (2003). Nature Walks and Sunday Drives ‘Round Edmonton. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada: Edmonton Natural History Club. Salvesen, D. (1994). Wetlands: Mitigating and Regulating Development Impacts. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.

References Santamouris, M. (ed.) (2001). Energy and Climate in the Urban Built Environment. London: James and James. Saunders, D. A. and Hobbs, R. J. (eds.) (1991). Nature Conservation 2: The Role of Corridors. Chipping Norton, NSW. Australia: Surrey Beatty. Schmandt, J. and Clarkson, J. (eds.) (1992). The Regions and Global Warming: Impacts and Response Strategies. New York: Oxford University Press. Schmid, J. A. (1975). Urban Vegetation: A Review and Chicago Case Study. University of Chicago, Department of Geography, Research Paper 161. Schneider, A., Fiedl, M. A., McIver, D. W., and Woodcock, C. E. (2003). Mapping urban areas by fusing multiple sources of coarse resolution remotely sensed data. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 69, 1377--86. Schonewald-Cox, C. M. and Bayless, J. W. (1986). The boundary model: a geographic analysis of design and conservation of nature reserves. Biological Conservation, 38, 305--22. Schrepfer, S. R. (1983). The Fight to Save the Redwoods. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. Schwartz, H. (2004). Urban Renewal, Municipal Revitalization: The Case of Curitiba, Brazil. Alexandria, VA: Published by the Author. Seddon, G. (1997). Landprints: Reflections on Place and Landscape. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sieghardt, M., Mursch-Rasdlgruber, E., Paoletti, E., et al. (2005). The abiotic urban environment: impact of urban growing conditions on urban vegetation. In C.C. Konijnendijk et al. (eds.), Urban Forests and Trees: A Reference Book. Berlin: Springer, 281--323. Simmonds, R. and Hack, G. (eds.) (2000). Global City Regions: Their Emerging Forms. London: Spon Press. Sit, V. F. S. (1995). Beijing: The Nature and Planning of a Chinese Capital City. New York: John Wiley. Sklar, F. and Costanza, R. (1990). The development of dynamic spatial models for landscape ecology: a review and synthesis. In M. G. Turner and R. H. Gardner (eds.), Quantitative Methods in Landscape Ecology. New York: Springer-Verlag, 239--88. Smit, J. (2006). Farming in the city and climate change: the potential and urgency of applying urban agriculture to reduce the negative impacts of climate change. Urban Agriculture Magazine, 15. Smit, J. and Nasr, J. (1992). Urban agriculture for sustainable cities: using wastes and idle land and water bodies as resources. Environment and Urbanization, 4, 441. Smith, R. L. (1996). Ecology and Field Biology. New York: HarperCollins. Smith, W. H. (1981). Air, Pollution and Forests: Interactions Between Air Contaminants and Forest Ecosystems. New York: Springer-Verlag. Snyder, G. (1990). The Practice of the Wild. San Francisco: North Point. Soja, E. A. (2000). Postmetropolis: Critical Studies of Cities and Regions. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Song, I.-J. and Jin, Y.-R. (2002). A model of enhancing biodiversity through analysis of landscape ecology in Seoul cultivated area. Korean Journal of Environmental Ecology, 16, 249--60.

375

376

References Sorrie, B. (2005). Alien vascular plants in Massachusetts. Rhodora, 107, 283--329. Soule, M. E. (1991). Land use planning and wildlife maintenance: guidelines for conserving wildlife in an urban landscape. American Planning Association Journal, 57, 313--23. Spirn, A. W. (1984). The Granite Garden: Urban Nature and Human Design. New York: Basic Books. Spirey, A. (2002). Built environment: rooftop gardens, a cool idea. Environmental Health Perspectives, 110(11). Starling, F. L. do R. M. (2000). Comparative study of the zooplankton composition of six lacustrine ecosystems in Central Brazil during the dry season. Revista Brasileira Biololeogia 1(60), 101--11. State of the World’s Cities 2006/2007. (2006). London: Earthscan. Steinberg, D. A., Pouyat, R. V., Parmalee, R. W., and Groffman, P. M. (1997). Earthworm abundance and nitrogen mimeralization rates along an urban-rural land use gradient. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 29, 427--30. Steiner, F. (1994). Regional planning in the United States: historic and contemporary examples. In T. J. Bartuska and G. L. Young (eds.), The Built Environment: Creative Inquiry Into Design and Planning. New Brunswick: CRISP Publications, 319--29. Steiner, F. (2002). Human Ecology: Following Nature’s Lead. Washington, DC: Island Press. Steinitz, C. and McDowell, S. (2001). Alternative futures for Monroe County, Pennsylvania: a case study in applying ecological principles. In V. H. Dale and R. A. Haeuber (eds.), Applying Ecological Principles to Land Management. New York: Springer, 165--93. Stubbs, J. and Clarke, G. (eds.) (1996). Megacity Management in the Asia and Pacific Region: Policy Issues and Innovative Approaches. Volume I. Manila, Philippines: The Asian Development Bank. Sukopp, H. and Hejny, S. (eds.) (1990). Urban Ecology: Plants and Plant Communities in Urban Environments. The Hague, Netherlands: SPB Academic Publishing. Sukopp, H., Numata, M., and Huber, A. (eds.) (1995). Urban Ecology as the Basis of Urban Planning. The Hague, Netherlands: SPB Academic Publishing. Sukopp, H. and Werner, P. (1983). Urban environment and vegetation. In W. Holzner, M. J. A. Werger, and I. Ikusima (eds.), Man’s Impact on Vegetation. The Hague, Netherlands: W. Junk Publishers, 247--60. Sutcliffe, A. (ed.) (1980). The Rise of Modern Urban Planning, 1800--1914. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Swanson, F. J., Jones, J. A., Wallin, D. O., and Cissel, J. H. (1994). Natural variability -implications for ecosystem management. In East Side Forest Ecosystem Health Assessment. Volume 2. Ecosystems Management: Principles and Applications, Portland, OR: US Forest Service, Report GTR, 89--103. Swenson, J. J. and Franklin, J. (2000). The effects of future urban development on habitat fragmentation in the Santa Monica Mountains. Landscape Ecology, 15, 713--30. Takaya, Y. (1987). Agricultural Development of a Tropical Delta: A Study of the Chao Phraya Delta. Honolulu, University of Hawaii Press.

References Thayer, R. L., Jr. (2003). LifePlace: Bioregional Thought and Practice. Berkeley: University of California Press. The Management Plan for the Greenbelt. (1995). The Planning Framework -- Le Plan. Ottawa: National Capital Commission. Theobald, D. M. and Hobbs, N. T. (1998). Forecasting rural land-use change: a comparison of regression- and spatial transition-based models. Geographical and Environmental Modelling, 2, 65--82. Theobold, D. M., Miller, J. R., and Hobbs, N. T. (1997). Estimating the cumulative effects of development on wildlife habitat. Landscape and Urban Planning, 39, 25--36. Tjallingii, S. B. (1995). Ecopolis: Strategies for Ecologically Sound Urban Development. Leiden: Backhuys Publishers. Tonmanee, N. and Kuneepong, P. (2004). Impact of land-use change in Bangkok metropolitan and suburban areas. In G. Tress, B. Tress, B. Harms, et al. (eds.), Planning Metropolitan Landscapes: Concepts, Demands, Approaches. Wageningen, Netherlands: DELTA Series 4, 114--23. Townsend, C. R., Harper, J. R., and Begon, M. (2000). Essentials of Ecology. Malden, MA: Blackwell Science. Tress, G., Tress, B., Harms, B., et al. (eds.) (2004). Planning Metropolitan Landscapes: Concepts, Demands, Approaches. Wageningen, Netherlands: DELTA Series 4. Trocme, M., Cahill, S., de Vries, H. (J. G.), et al. (eds.) (2003). Habitat Fragmentation Due to Transportation Infrastructure: The European Review. Brussels: European Commission, COST Action 341. Troy, P. N. (1995). Australian Cities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Troy, P. N. (1996). The Perils of Urban Consolidation. Sydney: Federation Press. Tuan, Y.-F. (1977). Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Turner, B. (2005). The Statesman’s Yearbook 2005. New York: Macmillan. Turner, B. L., Clark, W. C., Kates, R. C., et al. (eds.) (1990). The Earth as Transformed by Human Action: Global and Regional Changes in the Biosphere Over the Past 300 Years. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Turner, M. G., Gardner, R. H., and O’Neill, R. V. (2001). Landscape Ecology in Theory and Practice. New York: Springer-Verlag. Turner, M. G. (2005). Landscape ecology: what is the state of the science? Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 36, 319--44. Turner, T. (1992). Open space planning in London: from standards per 1000 to green strategy. Town Planning Review, 63, 365--86. Ulrich, R. S. (1984). View through a window may inﬂuence recovery from surgery. Science, 224, 420--1. United Nations Population Division. (2001). World Urbanization Prospects: The 2001 Revision. New York: United Nations. United Nations Population Division. (2005). World Population Prospects: The 2005 Revision. New York: United Nations. Vallejo, R. and Alloza, J. A. (1998). The restoration of burned lands: the case of eastern Spain. In J. M. Moreno (ed.), Large Forest Fires. Leiden: Backhuys, 91--108.

377

378

References van Bohemen, H. D. (2004). Ecological Engineering and Civil Engineering Works: A Practical Set of Engineering Principles for Road Infrastructure and Coastal Management. Delft, Netherlands: Directorate-General of Public Works and Water Management. van den Bergh, C. J. M. and Verbruggen, H. (1999). Spatial sustainability, trade and indicators: an evaluation of the ecological footprint. Ecological Economics, 29, 61--72. van der Ree, R. and McCarthy, M. A. (2005). Inferring persistence of indigenous mammals in response to urbanization. Animal Conservation, 8, 309--19. Verboom, J. and Wamelink, W. (2005). Spatial modeling in landscape ecology. In J. A. Wiens and M. R. Moss (eds.), Issues and Perspectives in Landscape Ecology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 79--89. Vernez Moudon, A. (ed.) (1989). Master-planned Communities: Shaping Exurbs in the 1990s. Seattle, WA: University of Washington, College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Proceedings of Urban Design Program Conference. Vigier, F. C. D. (1997). Housing as an evolutionary process: planning and design implications. In W. A. Allen, R. G. Courtney, E. Happold, and A. M. Wood (eds.), A Global Strategy for Housing in the Third Millennium. London: E & FN Spon, 89--106. von Krosigk, K.-H. (2001). Der Berliner Tiergarten. Berlin: Markus Sebastian Braun. von Stulpnagel, A., Horbert, M., and Sukopp, H. (1990). The importance of vegetation for the urban climate. In H. Sukopp (ed.), Urban Ecology. The Hague, Netherlands: SPB Academic Publishing, 175--93. Vos, C. C., Baveco, H., and Grashof-Bokdam, C. J. (2002). Corridors and species dispersal. In K. J. Gutzwiller (ed.), Applying Landscape Ecology in Biological Conservation. New York: Springer, 84--104. Wackernagel, M. and Rees, W. (1996). Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth. Gabriola Island, British Columbia, Canada: New Society Publishers. Warner, S. B., Jr. (2001). Greater Boston: Adapting Regional Traditions to the Present (Metropolitan Portraits). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Warren, R. (1998). The Urban Oasis: Guideways and Greenways in the Human Environment. New York: McGraw-Hill. Wein, R. (2006). Coyotes Still Sing in My Valley: Conserving Biodiversity in a Northern City. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada: Spotted Cow Press. Wetzel, R. G. (2001). Limnology. Philadelphia: Saunders. Wetzel, R. G. and Likens, G. E. (2000). Limnological Analyses. New York, Springer. Wheater, C. P. (1999). Urban Habitats. London: Routledge. White, R. R. (2002). Building the Ecological City. Cambridge, UK: Woodhead Publishing. Whitehand, J. and Morton, N. (2004). Urban morphology and planning: the case of fringe belts. Cities, 21, 275--89. Wickham, J. D., O’Neill, R. V., and Jones, K. B. (2000). Forest fragmentation as an economic indicator. Landscape Ecology, 15, 171--9. Wiens, J. A. (2002). Riverine landscapes: taking landscape ecology into the water. Freshwater Biology, 47, 501--15. Wiens, J. A. and Moss, M. R. (eds.) (2005). Issues and Perspectives in Landscape Ecology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

References Wilcove, D. S., Rothstein, D., Dubow, J., et al. (1998). Assessing the relative importance of habitat destruction, alien species, pollution, overexploitation, and disease. BioScience, 48, 607--15. Williams, N. S. G., Morgan, J. W., McDonnell, M. J., and McCarthy, M. A. (2005). Plant traits and local extinctions in natural grasslands along an urban--rural gradient. Journal of Ecology, 93, 1203--13. Williams, R. (1983). Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. New York: Oxford University Press. Willis, K. G., Turner, R. K., and Bateman, I. J. (eds.) (2001). Urban Planning and Management. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wilson, E. O. (1992). The Diversity of Life. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Witham, J. H. and Jones, J. M. (1987). Deer--human interactions and research in the Chicago metropolitan area. In L. W. Adams and D. L. Leedy (eds.), Integrating Man and Nature in the Metropolitan Environment. Columbia, MD: National Institute for Urban Wildlife, 155--9. Wong, S. (2004). Cities, Internal Organization of. International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1825--29. Woodlands New Community. (1973--74). Philadelphia: Wallace, McHarg, Roberts, and Todd. World Bank. (2006). Where is the Wealth of Nations? Measuring Capital for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: World Bank. Wu, F. (2006). Globalization and the Chinese City. New York: Routledge. Wu, J. (2007). Making the case for landscape ecology: an effective approach to urban sustainability. Landscape Journal, in press. Wu, J. and Hobbs, R. (2007). Key Topics in Landscape Ecology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Yamamoto, M. (1930). Japan Geographic Compendium: Nine States Kyushu (in Japanese). Tokyo: Gennosuke Inoue Publisher. Yang, R. (2004). Planning Outline for the Tourist Attraction System in Beijing City 2005--2025. Beijing: Tsinghua University, Institute of Urban Planning and Design and Institute of Resource Protection and Tourism. Yaro, R., Arendt, R., Dobson, H., and Brabec, E. (1990). Dealing with Change in the Connecticut River Valley: A Design Manual for Conservation and Development. Amherst, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. Yu, K. and Padua, M. (eds.) (2006). The Art of Survival: Recovering Landscape Architecture. Mulgrave, Victoria, Australia: Images Publishing Group. Zaitzevsky, C. (1982). Frederick Law Olmsted and the Boston Park System. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Zipperer, W. C. and Foresman, T. W. (1997). Urban tree cover: an ecological perspective. Urban Ecosystems, 1, 229--49. Zonneveld, I. S. and Forman, R. T. T. (eds.) (1990). Changing Landscapes: An Ecological Perspective. New York: Springer-Verlag.

379

Index

Abeche, Chad 115, 163, see Color Figure 2

ecology 99--102 pollution 8, 44, 48, 102--5, 203, 265,

adaptability 59--60, 198, 237,

323, 335

245, 270--2 adaptation 90--1

quality 48, 110, 116, 120

administrative unit 37--8, 183--4, 196, 197 aerosol 103, 105, 334

aircraft 121, 172--6, 324 airports 116, 118, 121, 172--6, 276

aesthetics 33, 75, 238, 276, 301

allotment /garden 92, 111, see also community

in city design 41--2, 43 aggregation, see cluster

amenity, ecological criteria 301

agricultural areas 111, 152, 293

Anoia area, Lower 261, 264, 265, 269

economics 62 land in urban-region ring 155, 187, 190--1 landscape 5, 24, 45, 151--2, 251--2, 272, 293 threat to 279--80 woods/ﬁelds in 154 runoff 96 agriculture 119, 150--2, 332, see also cropland, farmland, market, urban -nature park 77, 252, 268, 272, 276, 291 urban, see urban air 11 cooling 104, 157, 166

380

growth/development 260--1 locality-centered region 302 receiving city output 319 for waste assimilation 65--6 Atlanta, USA 46, 192, 213--15, 206, see Color Figure 3 atmosphere 102--5, see also air atmospheric cell 11 Australia 13, 114, 115, 171, 202 avoidance zone 23, 171, 233

aquaculture 77, 78 aquatic

Bamako, Mali 163, see Color

biologist 253, 255, 257 ecosystem 94, 269 habitat, degraded 24 aquifer 8, 93, 159, 161, 231, 274 importance 274 surface covering 56, 93 pollutants and protection 254, 333 architecture 13, 41, 76, 277, 329 area 5, 8, 52--4 disaster/extreme weather 321, 324, 329

Figure 4 Bangkok 68, 202, 321, see Color Figure 5 Barcelona Catalunya, Spain 114, 244, see Color Figure 6 agricultural park by 77, 176 building in 41 distinctive feature in 245--6 greenspace in 206 highway overpass near 295 land protection near 201

Index large Collserola natural area by 73 Parque Guell in 180, see Color Figure 40 planning project, see GBR Region 47, 48, 220--1,

birds 92, 275, 300 birth or birth rate 3, 54 blue-green ribbon 250, 255--6, see also stream border, see also boundary,

carbon, 83, 85, 104, 318, 326 case studies 207, 211, 214--15,

326

288

barrier 23, 146--7, 159--60, 171, 264 bay, coastal 98, 158--60, 286 Beijing, China 12, 45, 172, 183--4, 339, 341, see Color Figure 7 Berlin, Germany 12, 45, 47,

Boston 7, 46, 73, 98, 180, 301, 302, 341 boundary 113--19, 151, 205,

conspicuous around city

under urban region Brasilia 41--2, 45, 73, see Color Figure 9 Bucharest, Romania 45, see Color Figure 10 buffer 60, 111, 300

chain 84, 323 165, see also species farmland and 252

beneﬁcial planned 18

290, 329, see also

buildings 7, 25, 76, 317

biodiversity 9, 25--6, 34, 86,

30--1 change, see also climate chemical 96

103, 106, 165, 178,

bioaccumulation in food

222 Celebration, Florida, USA,

225--6, 230, 240,

see Color Figure 8 Bhopal, India 323

320, see Color Figure 12

city, metro area, 193--7, 261--2, 287,

water source for 268

11 Canberra, Australia 41, 43,

political 183, 186--8,

243--81, 304, 314, Regional 247, 290--5

Cairo, Egypt see Color Figure

removal 202, 263, 269, 276, 292 built area 6--7, 64, 164, 177--89, 197, 260--8, 279--80 airport in 174

198 distant 16, 290 ecologically optimum 240 economic/social/cultural 73, 74 land 199--206, 239--42 in landscape or region 245 location for 240 model, spatial land 199--206 in mosaic pattern 18, 241

in ﬂoodplain 256, 258

border 7, 193--7, 297

high 86, 89, 97, 98, 106,

compact 297

as norm 89, 205

distribution 240

of pattern and function

109, 152 in large natural area 302 maintaining factors 296, 299 protection 14, 48, 304 of region 37--8 site 117, 121, 140, 348

ecological solution 156

239 of a place 342, 343

and ﬁre 250--1

in planned town 299

and greenspace 112,

in population density

164--6

199

growth adjacent to 262

rapid 5, 336, 344

size 7, 116, 120

of regulation 335

spread of 234--9

resistance to 344

sustained 40

in urban region 6--7

of space 316

in urban region 332

water in 24--5, 155, 156,

and urbanization 211--15, 216

biomass 82, 83 biophilic design 76, 165, 317, 342, 343 bioregion 13--14

163

speciﬁc, sequence of 240 technological 57, 60, 64

built environment 67, 198--9

in trade 57, 64

built system 7, 164--77, 197,

trend suggests 246

260--8, 280

urbanization as 343

381

382

Index channel, water in 24, 94, 95, 230 Chernobyl 320, 323--4 Chicago, USA 12, 46, 98,

economics in 61

resident 65, 220

ecosystem 237

on river 111, 158--9,

288

189--90, 192--4, 201,

European 65

203, 211--15, see

evolution of 151

Color Figure 13

externality cost for 63

cities GBR solution and 291--3 greenspace connectivity 332

283--7, 285, 287, 328

environmental gradient size

and water supply 160--1 effect 150, 153, 154,

food-growing space in 77

169, 170, 171, 175,

form of 61

182, 185, 187, 191, 194--7

gap near 149 greenspace in 275, 318

large 115, 171, 191, 192, 261, 285, 343

linked 11

growth 70, 180, 269, 292

policy for 336--7

industrial 332

medium 115

selection for study

inland 285, 321

relative, of nearby 117

input and output for

small 115, 171, 179,

113--19 urban region in ring of 289

201, 343

318--19 interacts with

urbanization and 219 as social entity 73

urbanization in 208

surroundings 6

city 43, 107, 108, 109--10, 116,

and key landscapes 65--6

as source and sink 15

land and value 62, 63,

spread of 15

237, 316, see also megacity, metro

73

street 317

area, satellite,

linkage area for 65--6

sustainability of 318

urban region

machine analogy 237

system, whole 65, 318--19

major 116--17, 197

in urban region 7

metabolism 237

in valley between ridges

agriculture near 152--4, 332 airport and port 175

mountains 285, 287, 288

architecture in 12

natural area system 65,

area of 106, 113 bioregionalism and 13 border of 6 boundary 116 as box 318--19 center 12, 106, 316

park 7, 20--2 pattern for 305--6, 308--9, 312--13

to metro area border

planning 12, 16, 40, 41,

328--9

water supply for 161,163 water-body, near 158--9, 160, 287

near 267

on peninsula 287

217, 219, 347, 351

318

73 semi-, 206

megacity 338--9

coastal 283--7, 321--2,

285 water ﬂow in and out of

43, 46 population 2--3, 6, 114, 149, 324, 338

climate, see also microclimate change 70, 103, 202, 253, 277, 325--9, 343 dry 78, 332 Mediterranean 11 cluster of neighborhoods 238 of wetlands 228

composition of 19--20

port near 176

connections to 171, 332

problem in 45

cropland landscape 153

production in 318--19

built-up 160

culture in 12, 74

region affected by near

city location relative to

on delta 285 destruction 59

289 in region, large 11--12

coast 97--9

190, 285, 287 ﬂooding of low area 328

Index line 97, 99, 109, 180, 185

sense of 72, 238--9

soil 9

low-lying urban area

utopian 298

of species 35, 227

202 marine 37, 93--9, 347, 350

commuter 6

consistency 219--20

rail line 46, 104, 116,

consumption 52, 54--5, 57--8,

near city 158--60

121, 171--2, 173,

and urbanization 217

233--4

area, urban impact on 48

64, 66, 318 controversy 266, 277 cookie-cutter imprint 337

compact

coastal

water or aquatic 9, 35

population 172

development 17, 43, 46, 62, 236, 237, 297

cool air drainage 104, 157 cooling

barrier beach 69

form 200, 209, 229, 283

evaporative 326

city 283--7, 318, 321,

growth 267

power/waste water for

328--9 damage 300

growth model 64 metro area 287

332 corridors

donut geometry 286

competition 19, 91, 197, 203

attributes of natural 18

ecology 93--9

concentric zones 200, 237

characteristic 245

effect 103 indentation 285 microclimate 286 natural area/park 180, 286 wetland 97--8 cold air drainage, 157 Collserola, by Barcelona 73, 261, 274

urbanization185,241,332 model 203, 208--9, 214,

connectivity 231 of development 176

216, 218, 220, 347--8

of emerald network 331

conﬂict 3, 21, 42, 67, 73, 188

function and control231

connections

gap in 231

to city 171

green 108, 111

among objects 325

as habitat 328

connectivity 38, 147--8, 205, 250--1, 268, 291

highway 109, 111, 233, 264

commercial growth 62, 297

between cities 332

large north--south 328

community 67--8

between emeralds 275

major/wide green 38--9, 108

adversity and 70

landscape 23, 232, 233

bisected 72

for nature 145--7

model 204

commuters in 116, 223--4

for people or wildlife

natural 229--32

development 151, 234--9

152, 176--7, 250--1,

patches attached to 231

environment 237--8

331--2

pipeline 110 protection of 328

history 242

severed 206

horizontal/vertical 86--8

in transport system 60

radial 235

garden 92, 111, 239

see also corridor

radiating from park21--2

functionality of 240

conservation 9, 33--5

railway/railroad 109

future of 237

habitat for 226--7

between regions 331

income 68

of nature/resources 33,

river/stream 109, 110,

local 75, 295--304 mixed-use 235 park in 255, 257 planned 297, 298 of species 9 road in 234

55 partners in 33, 35, 36, 39 planning 5, 16, 27, 33, 245 priority 39, 227, 330

111 string of pearls 331 or strip 20, see also patch, stream vegetated 39 width 231

383

384

Index corridors (cont.)

decision, tyranny of small 199

with pearl, green 267 wooded 25 water-protection 302 cost 4--5 externality 55, 57, 63

degradation

developing nation 70, 75, 332, 338, 340 development 260--3, see also

of biodiversity 206

economic, strip,

of common land 72--3

sustainable, transit,

community ecosystem 226

of growth, model for 64

urbanization area for 260--1, 277 and community 234--9

housing 62

in distant area 330

of land 37

effect 168

compact 17, 62, 236, 237

resource use/pollution

of emerald 330--1

concentrated or

55, 58

environmental 62, 69

dispersed, 202, 235

saving by location 297

habitat 29, 329

constraint on 263

and water-scarcity 255--6

humans and 58--9, 66

corridor 176

of key piece 73

density 237

of protected area by city

economic investment

cove 98, see also wedge along coast 98

73

and lobe 26, 287, 288 greenspace 183, 287, 288 crisis 4--5, 53, 237, 245, 344--5

economics 62

slowed environmental

on hill slope 321

345

cropland 111, 119, 146, 150--6, 174 as dominant land use 186--8 matrix, metro area and 288 near metro area 191--2 culture 33, 44, 51, 66--7, 73--8, 197, see also socio-cultural center 238, 339 connection from 315, 334 and ecology 13, 14 local and global 13

200, 234--9

or natural system 4, 344

due to urbanization 216 zone 23, 104, 233 densiﬁcation 9, 198--9, 261

with natural system 72 linked to existing 204, 297 and low-ecological-value area 235

density -dependent factor 89

location 235--7, 297, 324

human population 68,

natural area for future

240, 324 of people and buildings 9, 20, 198, 237 desert/desertiﬁed area 111, 119, 120, 347, 349

300 nature-gets-the-leftovers 301 in new urbanism, land 299

and urbanization 216

pattern 307--8, 310--11

in urban-region ring 192

between radial highways

design 44, 60, 88, 183

185 relocation of 328--9

resource for 44, 175

biophilic 165, 317

site preservation 35

ﬁne-scale 27

residential 17, 71

symbol of 274

LEED approach 76

satellite city and 60, 296

urban 12, 294

for long term 241

spread of built area

cumulative effect 19, 26, 241, 247, 258, 266--7, 273 value at initial stage 281 Cuttack, India see Color Figure 14 cyclone 3, 98, 188, 322

nature and 13 for people 18 spatial attribute for 67--8 detention basin, stormwater 23, 42, 97, 237 developed nation 335, 338, 340--1

234--9 stimulation of 62 sustainability 60, 335 directionality 289 disaster 42, 64, 181, 188--9, 236, 315, 319--25 disease 324

Index dispersal 39, 92--3, 177--80, 232, 252 dispersed development 235 patches model 204 220 sites, urbanization in 241, see also under model small woods 154

and culture 13, 14 and land protection 226 in planned town 301 economic

ecosystem 8, 57, 82, 84, 89, 297 city 237

development,

degradation of 82--93

transportation in

ecology 226

232--4

restored aquatic 269

dimension 51--78

domesticated species 330

dividend from investing

area 47, 94, 160--3, 231,

national park and 330--1 ecoregions 13--14, 37--8, 330

boom 280

diversity 60, 150--2, 272, 325 drainage 68, 237, 254

regional 265

in natural system 244--5

service 32, 34, 56, 74, 105, 320 ecosystems and economics 54 edge 225--6, 229, see also

237, see also under

gain 5

water

growth 53, 57, 61

border, boundary

as big idea 334

built area with sharp

and water supply 117, 162, 217, 250, 347, 350 and ﬁlling of wetland 229

investment in land and nature 5, 234--9 economically productive area 226 economics 5, 51, see also

297 city 46 density 347, 351 hard/soft 88 model 204

earthquake 3, 188, 320--1

agricultural,

node of industry 235

East London, South Africa

development,

of city 180

ecological,

community, solution at

Color Figure 15 ecological

environmental,

298 municipal

accountability 301

growth, land,

analysis 290

market, natural

constraint removed 48

resource,

criteria as amenity or

regulatory,resource,

natural community 225

socioeconomics,

park for town or satellite

aesthetics 301 degradation of lake/reservoir 300

sustainability, urban region

park along 267 industry on 265

city 238, 266, 292 portion 29

dimension 47

and ecosystems 54

ratio, interior to 330

economics 51--9, 61, 65,

food producing areas

species 91, 225

344 footprint 52, 59--66, 319 function/value 107 gain, extensive 255, 257 spatial attribute 141, 206

252 ecological 51--9, 61, 65, 344 growth and market 199, 344

succession 88, 89

planning and 245, 280

value, area of low 5, 235

and scarce water 332

ecologist 13, 68--9, 89, 295--304, 331 ecology 47, 80--2, 115

in space and time 59--66 economy climate and local 326

vegetation molded by 87 and urbanization 217, 219 Edmonton, Canada 121, 173, 206, see Color Figure 16 emeralds 36, 249--50, 268, Boston 46, 73,180,297--8 connection between 268, 275, 32

385

386

Index emeralds (cont.)

Europe 10, 106, 114, 115,

invasive species and 331

170--1, 176

network 38--9, 48--9, 111,

eutrophication 85, 96, 101,

145--6, 249--51, 263, 272, 279, 291, 304, 327--8, 330--1 protection of 291 employment 68, 235, 265, 300 energy 8, 17--18, 82, 83--4 engineering 13, 253, 329

255--6, 257, 259 evapo-transpiration 93, 326--7, 334 externality 55, 57, 63 extinction 34, 39--40, 230, 325--32, 334, 343 proneness of species 227 exurban zone 10

beneﬁt 78, 328 challenge 315, 325

328 pulse 254 ﬂoodplain 5, 109, 166, 263 building on 262, 263 habitat /biodiversity 256, 258 radioactivity buried in324 vegetation 230, 256, 257--8, 293 water table in 32 as wetland 255--6, 257

environment 57--9, 65, 237--8 environmental

of low area 202, 277,

family 60, 63 growing food 77, 251, 252

ﬂow/movement 4, 6, 8, 15, 17--18, 107, 167 in city 166--8

condition 54, 91

farm 251, 252

directional 324

degradation 58, 62, 66,

farmland 78, 151, 152

foundation for planning

345 dimension 13, 47, 48, 299

feedback 15, 239, 272

low 96--7

fertilizer 78, 85, 101

along radial lines 116

economic and social 238

ﬁnance 53, 202

economics 54, 57--8, 61,

ﬁne scale, see also pattern,

335 gradient 232, 240, 288 impact 58, 76 issues, framework for 334 justice 68, 72

244

feral species 227

scale nature in biophilic design 76 road network 202

resource 62 food 138--63, 279--80 and agriculture 42, 251 area in GBR 248, 251--3, 263 chain/web 84, 296, 323

social linkage at 68

growing 77, 78, 251, 252

solutions, many 317--18

local 152--3 production pattern

management 237

ﬁre 44, 121, 250--1, 275, 320

organization 36

ﬁsh 48, 94--6, 111, 275, 284--5

political party 335

ﬁshing 69, 112, 253

transport of 77

protection agency 335

ﬂexibility 59--60, 152, 198,

in urban region 141,

quality 296

221, 245, 251, 270--2,

refugee 344

273, 293, 294, 328

resistance 89--90 resources 13

modal (transportation) 234

sensitivity 42, 261

ﬂexible land pattern 248

success, perception of 42

ﬂooding 188--9, 286, 320--3

306--7, 309, 313--14

150--5 waste, 318 footprint, ecological 52, 59--66, 319 forest/woodland 87, 111, 119, 137, 347, 348, see also wooded

environmentalism 57, 334--5

control 254--5, 297, 299

environment--human

damage 97--9

cutting 203

hazard 15, 120, 217, 254,

and ﬁre 250--1

relationship 237 Erzurum, Turkey 172, see Color Figure 17 estuary 69, 98, 275

256, 257--8, 269, 349 squatter housing and 63, 64, 68

fragmentation 64, 100 pattern 306--7, 309, 313--14

Index landscape 142--5, 147

planning project,

resource conservation 34

alternatives to

urban 56

268--71, 273

and urbanization 216

genetic deﬁciency 39--40, 89--91, 323

in urban-region ring 192

fragmentation 35, 38, 39, 64 reduced 233, 329

geography

land mosaic 205, 240 grassland 111, 119, 192, 300, 347, 348

economic 61 effect 154, 169, 170, 171, 175, 179, 182, 187,

of areas to protect 291

194, 195, 196,

environmental issues

197

greenspace 302, 304

landscape of 251 -size of landscape or

12, 113, 115

framework

334

urban-to-rural 88 grain

geographic area/region 11,

form and function 229 of urban region 282--90

of land value 237

urbanization and 219

and urbanization 216 Greater Barcelona Region, see Barcelona green city 43 corridor 177--80, 331

global

land-use 245

air circulation 11

marketing 80, 301

to understand

effect 2, 316

net 261--2, 267, 269, 294,

urbanization 203,

ecology 81--2

218

between local and 13

urban region ecology and planning 1--6 freshwater 93--7, 99, 318, 332

warming 326 government 60, 277 centralized 45--6, 49, 183--4

function/process 229--32, 245

city 44 control 52, 53, 64 externality cost for 63

gap or break 138, 148

incentives, food growing 77

near city 149 conditions in/around 231

Color Figure 40 GBR (Greater Barcelona Region) built area and built system in 260--8, 244--56, 274--81

roof 109, 326 wedge, see wedge greenbelt 20, 39, 45, 110, 200, 220 Boston 46 London 12, 73

market 53 national-state-province 36 natural area understood by 73 organization/group 48, 247

garden 2, 60, 315--17 Gaudi, Antoni 180, 243, see

corridor, natural

in Boulder 296--7

wildlife movement and 231

ribbon 250, see also

limitations on free

greenspace 331 between landscapes 145

177--80 political party 335

land 73

dynamics 88--9 between emeralds 275

296, 298 patch in metro area

and squatter housing 70 for urban region 336 and water demand 253 zoning by 62

market-gardening in 77 greenhouse 77, 251, 253, 276 decrease/increase 83, 85 gas 59--61, 104, 335 production 44 urban region source of 326 greenspace 7--10, 56, 80--108, 112, see also natural, park access to 7, 181--3 air cooled by 166

gradient environmental 87--8, 232, 240, 288

for amenity/aesthetics13 in Boulder 296, 297

387

388

Index greenspace (cont.) and built area structures

groundwater built area around 163

degraded 38--9, 86, 329--30

contaminated 324

diversity 226, 241

Chicago 12

deep 93

edge 225

between cities 332

ﬂow 4, 8, 230

ﬂoodplain 256, 258

in city 275, 318

high nitrate level in 255,

164--6, 239

257

near city, large 261

for species 51 fragmentation 233, 329

cluster 179

in Maresma 274, 276

heterogeneity 25--6, 86

in a community 46

pollutants in 110, 230

human 238

corridors 178, 221

shallow 93

isolated 226, 22

to deﬁne urban land

uses 333

interspersion 240

water recharge to 334

in planned town 299

for water supply 160--1,

removal, beneﬁt from

297 degradation 180, 183,

163

195 of key 73

restoration 147

growth

effect of losing 59

anticipation of 62

elongated 146

background resource

and ﬂooding 166 large 103, 107, 108, 165, 172, 178, 183

330

334 commercial 297

species 303 structure 94 type 106--7 underwater 98

concentrated/dispersed 5

health, see public heat-island effect 44, 100,

linear 146, 167

constraints on 200, 263

loss of 58--9, 73

and development 260--1

metro area and 178, 179,

economic 51--2, 53, 54,

herbivore 82, 84, 87, 92, 327

55, 59, 61, 344

hierarchical problem 48--50,

192, 195, 288 natural 105--6

as big idea 334

and neighborhood 234

exponential 89

network 73

market 199

102--3, 220, 326

239 hierarchy 272 of hexagons model 203

patches 46, 178, 206

intelligent 5

of nodes and routes 203

for people 302

model, economic 335

of priorities or emphasis

planning and protection

of municipality, limited

process 7, 88, 186,

261--2, 273

28 of roads and trafﬁc 22

plant/crop 101

theory 19, 242

in region 48

rate increase 91

with star-shaped nodes

role of 105--12, 166

population 89

small 107, 108, 178--80

residents chose slow 297

strip 235

location 262, 273, 292

tree and shrub cover in

urban 260--3

297, 301--4

327 wedge, see wedge

see also market gully 255, 256, 257--8

see also road, transportation across Collserola 274, 275 avoidance or

width of 116 greenways, regional system

203 highway 22, 71, 232--3, 264,

habitat 9, 27--8, 40, 225--9

or network of 39,

arrangement 93

46, 110, 235, see also

contrast 231

corridor

corridor as narrow 328

degradation zone by 23, 25, 171, 233 as barrier/divider 171, 200, 233, 304

Index corridor 109, 111, 200--1, 233, 264 distance to 217, 347, 351

alteration, unplanned 18 behavior, govern 334, 335--7

urbanization stimulates 202 impermeable surface 58, 96, 100, 189, 333

ﬂattened semi-circle 286

carrying capacity 65

length of ring 169

consumer 52

area 237

multilane 23, 118, 120,

control of species 227

increase in 254

-created resources added

in megacity 339

171--2, 295 network 44, 233 radial 168--72, 173, 201 ring 62, 168--72, 233, 287--8 solutions for 304 squatter housing near 68 in town, dealing with 301 two-lane 118, 171--2, see also road urbanization next to 209--10 hilly terrain 261, see also mountain, slope home 92, 244, 330, 342 homes, aggregated 336

for biodiversity 26 dependence on natural resource 244, 245 --environment relationship 237 habitat and range 238, 342 impact of 54, 58--9, 60, 225, 316 imprint 65--6 and natural system 55, 198

overuse of natural system 28, 36, 57--9

use/overuse of nature or natural system 1, 28, 36, 57--9, 199

density 5, 116 distance to park 20--1, 177 inﬁll 198, 200, 237, 297

waste 69, see also wastewater hurricane 3, 322--3, see also cyclone hydrology 96--7

near jobs 42

disrupted 22--3

segregation/cost of 62,

greenspace as sponge

63 single- multi-unit 17, 198 see also squatter human, see also people, population, public activity 4, 225, 240, 320 afﬁnity for a space 27

area 99, 120, 179 by-product waste 54, 57--8, 258--9 city 332 ecology 58 growth 261 waste 96 industry 263--5

342--3

lot 4, 17, 24--6, 62, 76,

composition of 20

air pollution 323

industrialized economy 52

scale 16--17

111, 299, 331

industrial

objects, nature with

garden 316

housing

incentives 77, 337

needs 4, 46, 320

perception 19

house

in suburbia 15 inbreeding 39--40

166, 321 as key to wetland

edge node of 235 heavy 265, 269, 294 investment in 62 modern facilities 5, 265, 323 pattern relative to 307--8, 310--11, 314 pesticide-producing 323 relocating 256, 258--9, 294, 323 on river 256, 258--9, 265 water use by 332--3 inﬂuence 6, 63, 283 infrastructure see buildings, highway, transport etc. input 16, 55, 319

restoration 256,

input/output for city 318--19

258--9

interior species 91, 225, 302,

immigration human 3, 54, 63, 68--70, 75, 202 species 89

330 interior-to-edge ratio 330 invasive species see under non-native

389

390

Index investment in development 20 government 326 industrial or commercial 62 interest, sustained by 57 land as 244

area and natural system 245 for buildings and

as resource 5, 55, 334 surface 4 threatened 37, 73

infrastructure 64,

trust 36

300

two types of 337

as capital/investment 4, 244

use area outlined 241

change 199--206, 239--42

change sequence 204

connected 250--1

conﬂict 21, 73

market-driven 63

conservation 60

domain, broad 337

marketing and image

consumed for residents

in drainage area 231

long-term, future 57, 60, 63

300 in natural system 244--5 residential development 63 in transportation 62 Iquitos, Peru 115, 146, see Color Figure 18 irrigation 78, 156, 332, 333

300 cover and aircraft noise 174

nature--human and 246

on river/stream 155--6

pattern 203--5, 335--7

and metro area 191,

planning 18, 27--33,

192

36, 235--9, 246

range of 114

policy for 337

type/area 118--20, 215

principle for 224

of urban-region ring

uncommon 312

191

isolated

framework 5, 245

zone, concentric 237 value

habitat 226, 227, 329

divided biophysically 14

natural landscape 149

economics 62--3

gradient 237

elsewhere, town and 300

or price 62, 63, 64,

jetsam/ﬂotsam in river 70

as home and heritage 4, 244

Kagoshima, Japan 98, see Color Figure 19 keystone predator 84 species 83, 227 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 107,

legal status of 73

202, 235 patchwork of 62, 63 and squatter housing

linked to people 11

68

management 27--33

wasted 244

mosaic 1--18, 26, 203,

landscape 141, see also

239--40, 242, 243--6,

agricultural,

273, 281

cropland, desert,

206, see Color

molding 223--42

forest/woodland,

Figure 20

plan 47

grassland, natural,

visionary 273, 282 lake 43--4, 94, 110, 111, 347,

ownership 62

350, see also

pattern 224, 239, 248

reservoir

protection 35--7, 63, 197,

beneﬁts/uses 158--61, 166 level, elevated 320, 321 planned town along only 300 land acquisition 63

301 and social pattern 72--3 ecology/cost/threat 226 near metro area 201

suburban change 17, 205--6, 239--42 connectivity 23, 232, 250--1 disjointed urbanized 10 distance from city 47, 144--5 ecologist 222, 246

Index ecology 16--18, 20, 81,

food 152--3

mapping 116, 117--18, 119, 346

199, 203, 224, 243,

people 33

247

and regional 241

Maresma 251, 253, 274, 276

space, accessibility and

market 77

functioning 17 grain-size 205

234

metric 141

locality 302--4, 342

open 147

location 113, 114, 226

approaches 58, 61, 66 control with incentives 337

open-ﬁeld 203

with air pollution 338

-driven investment 63

pattern 9, 203, 301

controversial 266

economics 55, 64, 344

providing input to city

for development 324

consumption in force

319 relative to broader region 14 role of habitat in larger 226 scale 2

or position, strategic 236

107, see Color

greenbelt 45, 73, 77

tied by processes 14 legal questions 5, 36--7, 73, 200, 245 linkages 232, 300 area for city, primary 65--6 Llobregat Floodplain/delta 251,

plan or urban study 12, 336 line 172

characteristic 245 -forming area 37

73 and surrounding land

perspective 54, 59, 60 planning/design 241 solution for community 237 spatial approach 245, 335--7 value lost or low 55

49 community 295--304 economy, climate and 326

cropland or natural

12

new growth 261, 269,

administration 35, 36,

heterogeneity 231 metro area ringed by 288

long-term

protection 56

local

84--5 matrix 111, 231--2

resident, footprint for 65

River 259, 267--8, 273

208--9, 287, 288

material ﬂow/cycle 82,

social neighborhood in

limitation 53

lobe 26, 180--3, 184--5, 192,

in ecosystem service 57 marketing 42, 300, 301

attribute of 18

261, 262

276

121, 249, 251, 350 urbanization 217, 219

region of 46

investment 60

277

area/landscape 110,

radial transportation

252, 256, 258--9, great park in 270, 273,

332

Figure 21

transformation of 199

65--6

192, 238, 252, 331,

and sense of place 342

airport 173

city and group of key

gardening 152, 153--4,

London, United Kingdom

structure or pattern 17 landscapes

52, 57

footprint 319

Lower Anoia area 261, 264, 265, 269 machine analogy, city and 237 macroclimate 11

with agriculture 291 measure biophysical 64 indirect 215 megacity 7, 65, 289, 334--41, 343 Melbourne, Australia 12, 46, 47, 200, 237, 318 metapopulation 39, 40, 90, 230 metro area 6--8, 19, 102, 107, 108, 109--10, 116, 120, 198--9, 200--2, 316 compact 287

391

392

Index metro area (cont.) pattern for 308--9, 312--13, 192, 209 border 10, 107, 108, 110

planning of 183--4

biological 40

ringed by natural matrix

bulges 200, 202, 220

and satellite 28 cities185,185,209

compact-growth 64 concentric-zones

urbanization by 208--9 determination 116,

for air pollution 48

problem in 45

size 146, 190, 191 and urban-region ring

117

width 288

development on 200

urbanization 206, 208--9, 214, 218, 220 corridor 204

length 192, 193, 194--5

squatter housing by 68

for cost of growth 64

patch near 110, 192--3

subdivided into sections

dispersed patches 204

289

to city center 217, 219, 347, 351 clean water upriver of 283--4

unbuilt space in 200

210--11, 214, 216,

urbanization in 210--11,

218, 220, 221--2,

289 and urban region 190, 215, 290

247 disaster in 181, 188--9

urbanization 206,

upriver of 111

compact 183, 184 cropland near 191--2,

dispersed sites

and urban-region ring

ecological footprint for 65--6

347--8 donut 7, 283--5, 287--8, 324--5 urbanization 206,

189--91, 283, 287--8,

210--11, 214, 218,

316

220, 221--2 ecological and

economics in 61

without water-body 289

and strip development

wetland by 289

environmental

see also wedge

economics 335

210 effects in 206

Mexico City

economic 53, 56, 61, 62

large natural area by 73

economic growth 335

market-gardening by 77

edge 204

expansion 185

as megacity 338

environmental

ﬁre entering 320

model for 212

form 114, 115, 180, 183,

regional emphasis of 12

few-nuclei 204

urbanization 207, 211,

for GBR, spatial 247--8

elongated 146--7, 180, 184--5

184, 289

214, 215

gaps near 148 greenspace 146, 178, 179, 195 land cover far/near

see also Color Figure 22

sensitivity 42

generic 19 gravity 200, 203

microclimate 102--5, 286

green wedge in 220

microhabitat 25, 97, 231

jaws 204

migration 36, 37, 92, 96, 97

jaws-and-chunks 204--5

land protection near 201

mine 118, 255--6, 257

journey-to-work 203

limited by greenspace

mineral nutrient 82, 84--5,

land change 199--206

191--2

101, 255, 257

288 by mountain range 288 natural system in 65 parks in 146

mitigation 59, 168, 176, 177 stormwater 23

211, 220 MSCP 48 multi-nodal 203

model

patch/corridor in 177--80

absence of 6

pattern for 305--6

aggregate-with-outliers

perimeter 180

mosaic-sequence 204--5,

151, 188

multi-scale hierarchy of hexagons 203 mutating economic 57

Index nucleus 204

ridge/range 116, 118, 157, 180, 185, 288

of land-use pattern and change 203--5 patch/corridor/matrix 17--18, 38, 242 prime-footprints 319

movement dispersed 172 lateral 62 individuals among groups 39

robust 57

area 8, 72, 73, 75 for biodiversity 302 and built area 167--8 coastal, threatened 286 cultural value of 75 left for future 300

rotating sector 203

of people 62, 168

or park, coastal 180

satellite-cities

among small patches

rare bird in 275

230

urbanization 209, 214, 218, 220--1

by squatter, site-to-site 63

sector 203 simple spatial 199, 204 simulation 204--5

see also under species MSCP (Multiple Species Conservation Plan),

spatial

48, 49, 304

change 203 transition 204 time stages in 347 transportation and air pollution 203

in TOD 72 town in 188 urbanization and 73 vertebrate in, large 330 community 8, 9, 86--9,

multiple functions and objectives 9

traditional economic 57

strip development 221 three scales of 142--5

225, 226 corridor 40, 231--2, 250

goal solutions 28

disaster, see disaster

lines of defense 329

emerald see emerald

ownership 36

forest 53

urbanization 206,

stakeholders 45

habitat 8, 9, 226

209--10, 214, 218,

multi-use land area and

transportation-corridors

natural system 245

221 urbanization, see

municipality 5, 6, 7, 20, 260--4, see also

urbanization

satellite, town

modeling land change,

land 8 airport in 174 around river/stream 155 degraded 192

newer approach for

green-net near 261--2

in hazardous area 236

203

growth in 3, 262, 273

in urban region 219

industry on edge of 265

in urban-region ring

mosaic, see also land ceramic 243

investment 62

of greenspace types 7

linear park along edge 267

of land uses 28

Nairobi, Kenya see Color Figure 24

241 sequences204,208,211,214

Nantes, France 46, 207,

Moscow, Russia 12, 45, 77, 173, see Color Figure 23 mountain, see also slope city near 287, 288 as constraint 200

town in 187 landscapes 20, 23, 142--5, 147, 148, 149, 188

of nature and people 4 pattern, change in 18,

190, 191, 192

network 232 patch 36, 37--40, 110, 142--5, 154, 166, 233

211--15, see Color

patches, a few large 205

Figure 25

pattern and process 8

nation 57, 60, 63, 70, 335

process 223--30, 242

natural

resource 8, 16, 31, 52,

and human resources 198

54, 55, 175, 244--64 economics 57, 66

393

394

Index natural (cont.) protection 52, 55, 190, 191 selection 90, 92 system 1, 7--8, 9, 35, 80--112, see also nature beneﬁt to 5

near metro area 193

balance of 60, 61, 65

protection 249

meshed 4, 6, 16--18,

urban region plan 336 vegetation absorption of water 321 on aquifer 56, 231, 254

317 principle for 224, 242, 245 protection 5, 252 rarity of 31 reserve 8, 31--2 shreds of 318--19

by built area 165--8

corridor 328

in built area 165--8

in house lot 299

to space, adding 342--3

in city or metro area

and human-use space

sustained, bulk of 9

65

8

tourism 273, 293 in urban region 141,

and clean water 254

loss, ﬂood following322

and culture 74--6

matrix 288

degradation of 56, 344

network 232

and development 72

on nearby slope 157--8

economic dividend

patch 49, 225, 229

neighbor, protection by 68

protection of 56--7

neighborhood 20, 22, 67

244--5 in economic model 56, 334 facsimile of 165--6, 178 gain for 255, 257 human (over)use 57--9,

142--50 value of 74 wealth and 66

river/stream 155--6

and community 67--8

around water supply

creation of 43

161--2 nature 4, 7--9, 31, 35, 80, 89, 138--63, 279, 280

and greenspace 234 and park 21--2 low-income 63

199, 206, 215, 272,

appreciation of 76

parks 331

280

biophilic design for 76

quality of life in 71

and built environment

resident 110

humans and 4, 5, 54, 64 impacts on 54, 57--9, 188, 206

67, 329 change in 8 conservation 35, 38

social 73 scales, region, town and 302 species movement in

and land use 243

in culture 74--5, 76, 78

multi-use 245

design and 13

in planned town 299

and engineering 329

protection 245, 296

enhanced 72

neighborhoods 68, 238

restoration 291

and extreme weather

neighboring community 75

in short supply 56

329

solution provided by 5

--human interaction 246

sustained near city 6

and human objects

transportation in 232--4 in urban study 12 value or beneﬁt 4, 56--7 systems ﬂooding and 297

342--3 in a municipality 266--8 pattern for 306--7, 309 and people 24--6, 185, 216, 219, 243, 245, 248

21--2 unit 238

net, see green network 108, 111, 229--232, see also under emerald with connected components, system as 270--2 of green corridors 39 patch/corridor 302, 304 new urbanism 72, 298, 299

Index New York 12, 46, 47, 74, 100, 165, 178, 324, 338

oxygen input/output 318 ozone 104, 105, 110

nitrogen/phosphorus 85, 96, 255, 257 node industry in edge 235 with public transportation 72 nodes 203 noise 104, 319

parks 20--2, 165, 234, 238, 267

beneﬁt of 225 characteristic 245

268, 272, 291

density of green 183

city, see city

dynamics 89

in community, new 255,

group of 146

257 on edge of town or

36, 60, 63 plant 27 species 34, 88, 91, 106, 109, 227 source of 91, 110, 176, 331 habitat removal and 330 North America 64, 114, 115, 171, 177, 202 Norway 57, 60, 63 nursery business 110, 275, 331 nutrient, see mineral nutrient oil 46, 318 Olmsted, Frederick Law 40, 46, 73, 180, 297--8 open space 7, 10, 296--7, 302, see also greenspace Ottawa, Canada see Color Figure 26 output 16, 65, 319 overpass vegetated 264, 295 ownership of home/land 62, 63, 72--3

conditions between 40

central 238

trafﬁc 22, 23, 104

non-native

attribute of 18, 20, 40

agriculture--Nature 252,

design 165--6

organization (NGO)

attached to corridor 231

agricultural 252, 276

aircraft 121, 172--6, 174 non-governmental

also greenspace, natural

nitrogen 78, 85, 101, 265, 318

patches 19--20, 39, 108, see

satellite city 238, 267, 292 great 267, 268, 270, 273, 277 green corridor from 21--2 housing proximity 20--1, 177 large 21, 41, 109 movement of people and species in 21--2, 234

interaction between 229 large 302 natural 39, 142, 144, 145, 226, 249 medium-size 108 movement among small 230 nearby 40 number of linkages 232 population in small 225 resource protection in 225 size 205, 225--6, 229 species stuck in 327

national 330--1

small 25--6, 142

and neighborhood

in urban-region ring

interaction 21--2 pearls as 331 to protect nearby area, 292

166 valuable 226 path 71, 72, 331, see also walking

ring of 110

pathogen 78, 255, 257, 324

row of 146

pattern 304--12, 314

system 21, 234, 276 in urbanization 261--2 transportation from 21 patch/corridor

adaptable 241 around cities, policy 336--7 broad-scale 107, 108, 111, 239

system/network

deciphered 138

39, 49, 249, 302,

distinctive 115

304

ﬁne-scale 107, 108,

patch/corridor/matrix 107, 146, 245--6 model 17--18, 38, 242

109--10, 111--12, 239 land-use 335--7 and result 165, 171, 197

395

396

Index pattern (cont.) and spatial analysis 138--42

in parks, movement of

completion, subsequent to 277

234 by protected area 29

comprehensive 280

of a region 4

conceptual 243

goal to improve 224

relocation of 328, 329

detail for emphasis

paradigm 242

and resources 244

principle 248

with sense of place 343

pearls 11, 250, 276, 331

spatial diffusion of 199

Penedes 251, 275

urban 97

peninsula, city on 287

with vision 345

people 67--8, see also human,

water scarcity and 332

pattern/process 4, 239

public with allegiance to planet 316 area long populated by 8 capital of 63, 64 climate change and 326 close to city center 180 committed to city life 12 community created by unrelated 68 concentration of 68 consumption by different 66 diverse 13 ecological footprint of 64, 65 and habitat removal 330 input/output of 318 linked to land, diverse 11 magnet for 97

275--7 distinctive attribute for 246 for each sector 245 regional 48, 336 emphasizing a region 280

working together 42 peri-urban area 7, 10

ﬁne-scale 45

pesticide 78, 84, 110, 323

footprints and urban region as system319

petroleum, input/output for 318 Philadelphia, USA 146, 197,

implementable 247, 280 implementation and initial step 247, 248,

see Color Figure 27

278--81

metro area 189--90, 192--4 radial transportation line 172

independent 274 land mosaic 47, 48 for London 336

unusual pattern 218

minimal 268--70, 271

urban region 206,

most-promising 268--70, 271

213--15 phosphorus 85, 96, 255, 257

narrow-focus 28

physiography 180, 200, 283

puzzle-pieces 47

and urbanization 181, 215 pipe, water 254, 255--6, 257

response to 278--9 solid 268--70, 271 and speciﬁc area or issue 5, 271

place 27--8, 239, 341, see also sense

thinking changed by 281

movement of 62, 168

component of 67, 75

translated/published 277

natural resource for

for people 51

understandable 247

244--64 and nature 203, 211,

place theory 203, 242 stability/change 342, 343

planned

222, solution for 267 see also natural, nature non-native species carried by 331

water as a theme in 281 planet, allegiance to 316

vitality and meaning 43, plan 28, 43, 74 183, see also planned, planning for Barcelona Region 314

change, beneﬁcial 18 city 43, 44 community 44, 298 metro area obscured by urbanization 289

occupying land 63

beneﬁt of 270

packed together 74, 75,

of Chicago (1909) 12

town 298--301

city 42, 44

trajectory approach 47

324

Index planner 112, 277

attribute for 67--8

planning 5--6, 17, 20--1, 27--8,

scale for 245

295--304, 314, see also city, conservation,

against species 299, 300

land, land-use,

strategic 176, 185

regional, urban

timescale of 60

broad-scale pattern 241 centralized 41 climate and 70 and coastline damage 300 conformity produced by 299 as constraint 200 disaster-preparedness 189 for each section in region 270 for each sector 280 economic/social/political 27 ecoregion in 14 for environmental and recreation resources 13 foundation for 244 as good economics 245 and greenspace 301--4 for long term or large area 185, 241 locally to mesh with region 241 megacity and regional 341 option 19, 20--6

town-wide pattern for 301 for Valles landscape 276 plans for region, alternative 248, 268--71, 273 policy 4, 57, 334--8 ecological footprint and 66 based on sustainability 61 socioeconomic 46 policymaker 5, 28, 247 politicians 5, 28, 247, 275, 335 political unit 183--4, 196, 197 border 116 pollutant, see also radioactivity and wetland 227, 229 pollution air 101, 102--5, 203, 265, 323, 335, 338 of bay, from urban area 286 cloud of 324

wetland 227, 229 see also radioactivity pond 94, 166, 228--9 eutrophicated 85 population of city 2--3, 6, 106, 114, 115, 149, 150 data for urban region 140 decrease 3, 90, 324 density 34, 199, 201, 240 dispersed ecological footprint of 64--5 ecology 82--93 ﬁsh 94 growth 2--3, 53--4, 63, 70 and sprawl 64 by rail station 46 channeling 5 in megacity 341 rate 41, 43, 45 locally extinct 90 natural 89--93 of a species 9 pollutant carried to 265 size 2, 114, 149, 150, 330, 338, 343 in small patch 225 small or large 23, 39,

ﬁsh blocked by 284--5 groundwater 110, 230 industrial 90, 323 minimization 59 pattern 307--8, 310--11, 314

shortcoming of 42

and population 265

short-term 27

in reservoir 42

spatial 67--8, 138, 183,

river/stream 69, 109, 111

245

water 96, 98--9, 101, 335

degradation by 59

principle used in 223, 224

106 stormwater 23

effect 58

organization 50

project process 274--7

species response 105,

sources 5, 333--4

90 sustained, urban-region 76 world and national 1--2 port, shipping/ferry 118, 120, 175, 176 Portland, Oregon, USA 45, 47, 72, 107, 200, see Color Figure 28 poverty 63--4, 66, 68, 78

397

398

Index precipitation 39--40, 93, 253, 254, 322, 326, 334 acid 85

and human impact 225

bioaccumulation in 84, 323

288 protection

commuter railway 68, 109, 331 rare 34

aquifer 333

habitat 226

of area, great park for

species 31, 34, 37, 91,

292

keystone 84 and food

275, see also

metro area limited by

predator 82, 83, 91--2, 176

rail transport 45, 264, 274,

location relative to 226

of corridor 146, 328

106, 250--1, 300, 330 and biophilic design 76

web/biodiversity, top

of emerald 291, 296

83, 296

long-term 36

center of 94

of rare species 330

ﬁre-adapted 250--1

of stream corridor 292

habitat for 275, 303

principles for community 234--9 ecological 301 emphasizing

health 32, 76, 92, 105, 255, 257, 323, 324

function/process 229--32

in wetland 229, 256,

public

interest and attention

for GBR 247--8

29, 33, 35, 57,

general 40, 197, 199,

335

214--18, 222, 223--42 land mosaic or urban region 224, 239--42,

policy, see policy

tourism,

people transport 42, 44, 72, 237, 261--4, 267, 300 understanding of plan 73, 247, 336

for new urbanism 299

vision to lead 345

in planning 223

wetland species

protecting society 223

appreciated by 256,

proto-ecology 40

258--9

for transportation 232--4

pulse pattern 246, 254

put to work 314

radial highways 185

conservation 38, 330

transportation corridor

by-product of 54, 57--8 in city 318--19

235 radial-route trafﬁc capacity 233

economic 64

radiation 102

food 77, 82

radioactivity 84, 320, 323--4

productive area 65--6, 226 protected area or land 8, 9, 27, 28--9, 73, 111

walking/biking access to 42 broad-scale planning for 13 in edge of natural area 225 greenway for 24 nearby natural area for 56 site, one-day 29--31, 117, 140, 216, 348

ﬂow 287, 288

areas 291 production

squatter settlement 70 recreation 29--31, 179--80, 182, 296, see also

for nature and people224

priority 246

species 40, 90, 230

the 28, 53, see also

pattern and process 248

recolonization

preference 19

245--6 meshed with existing

257 vertebrates 83, 275, 327

Rahimyar Khan, Pakistan 115, see Color Figure 29

sites, many 15 swimming 85 redundancy 60, 272, 325, 328 region 1--16, 26, 198--222, see also ecoregion, geographic, urban alternative plans for 268--73 corridor connecting 331 as distinct important area 272

Index effects on each other 275, 283, 286, 289--90, 332

and megacity 341 scale 2 regionalism 11, 13

internal structure of

regulation/code/law 53,

linked landscapes in 14 local planning and 241 locality-centered or local or town-centered 302--4 as mid-size space 316--17 natural system and human use in 272

resource 52--8, see also natural for center of large patch

system 15

human activity in 11 14--16

and wildlife 296

degree of 46, 183--5

external effect of 14--16

landscape within 14

300

184

emphasis on a 280 geographic 11

land consumed for few

attribute suggesting

225 diverse 60 ﬂow/input/transfer 62,

334--6, 338, 344

65--6

regulatory

for growth, background

approach 5, 245, 334,

334

335

large area-dependent 36

economics 51--3, 54, 55,

people dependent on

58, 59, 61

distant expensive

reintroduction of wildlife

244

275

plastic bottle as 70

relocation of people and development 328,

protection 59, 60, 63

329

storage of 60

other towns in 302--4

representative habitat 226

planning for section in

reservoir 259, 273, 275

valuable 2, 29 restoration 31--2, 59, 168

in or near city 42, 43--4

habitat 147, 291

rest of the 263

dam 111, 118, 139, 160--2

project, mangrove 69

scales, town,

270

as key attribute 217, 220

river 293

neighborhood and

/lake 347, 350

stream corridor 156

302

for large city 161

wetland 229, 256, 258--9,

and sense of place 342 subdivided 201

292

planned town along only 300

ribbon blue-green 250, 255--6,

pollution or

regional air pollution 203

eutrophication in

approach 302, 304

42, 255--6, 257, 259

authority 50, 197 collaboration/thinking, 301 connectivity 331--2 ecology 81 emphasis 12 governance 336, 337--8 groups 67--8, 337 initiatives, sporadic 337

of pearls 250, 267

underground 4

see also corridor, natural

residential area 20, 43--4, 111, 121, 172, 261, 331 development 17, 22, 63, 71, 202 municipality 7 residents attracted to park 21

planning 14, 16, 45, 47,

inﬂuence of/on 297,

affecting form 289

267

protection for 250

and local 241 48, 50

see also stream connecting emeralds

301 isolated 220

ring of cities 289 highway 62, 168--71, 172, 184--5, 202, 221, 233 concentric-form 45 length of 169 urbanization and 171 of parks 110, 183, 200, 221

399

400

Index protected 156

riparian vegetation 96, 97, 111,

and strip development 221

230, 256, 257--8, 293, see also stream zone 24

in the suburbs 15 in urbanization model 211--15, 216

risk or risk-avoidance 145--7, 325

road, 22--3, 210 see also highway

rivers 98, 254, 272--3, see also

satellite city/cities 7, 115, 120, 185--6, 266--7, 296--8, see also city, town near Barcelona, 220--1 border length of 194--5 Boulder as 296--7, 298 edge park for 266, 292

closure 233

effect on development210

and area for visitors 293

in community 234

for growth and

coastal city by 286, 328

ﬁne-scale 202, 220, 221

as water supply160--2,333

on ﬂoodplain, small

river/stream

166

in Barcelona Region 259 bisecting city, large 283--5

(un)paved main 120 road-avoidance

city at intersection of285

or -degradation

city on 158--9, 283--7

zone 23, 233

conservation 35, 293

Rome, Italy see Color Figure 30

corridor 109, 111 jetsam/ﬂotsam in 70

development 60, 180, 260, 269, 277 growth of, limited 261--2 inner and outer 7 and metro area 186, 209--10 in modeling 209, 221 near natural area 185--6 number of 185, 186 outside of city 185

route

ladder pattern 231

ahead, best 315

several not few 220

with low ﬂow or

alternative 232

shaping development

ﬂoodwater channel

ﬁne-scale 25

120, 189

for sustainability 319

mouth of 68--70 pollution 255, 257, 284--5

runoff 230, 283--5 area 10, 166

tidal portion of 228

tourism outside region

349, see also river,

275 and urban 61--2, 63

163 corridor disruption 185--6 as key attribute 220 industry on 256, 258--9, 265 land cover around 155--6

saltwater 97, 119, 254, 333 Samarinda, Indonesia 115, see Color Figure 31 San Diego 46, 48, 49, 72, 84, 304 San Diego/Tijuana, 202, 206, 336USA/Mexico see Color Figure 32 Santiago, Chile 111, see Color

natural vegetation or cropland around 155--6

in urban-region ring 209 urbanization, beneﬁt of urbanization around 192, 201, 241, 332 urbanization model 209, 214, 216, 218, 220--1, 347--8

stream built area around 156,

solutions for 273

221

rural

size of 94, 118 river/stream 95, 120, 347,

266--7, 296

Figure 33 Sapporo, Japan see Color Figure 34

satellite images 117--18, 140, 316, 346 scale, see also broad, ﬁne, spatial human 16--17 pattern and process at different 239 and peoples loyalty 316 regulation at wrong 344 sequence of 19--20, 316 spatial 2, 17, 18--26, 67--8, 239

Index three (broader/ﬁner/same) 19, 142--5, 239 time 59--61, 208 urban region 2, 13, 67--8

bond and community

group of 241

connection or linkage

for highway, partial 304

67--8, 315, 334

for land or urban region

dimension 238--9

sector

entity as a whole, city as

plan for each 245, 280

317--18

community goal 299

sea-level 59, 202, 326, 328--9 model types 203

ﬁne-scale 24--5, 273, 292,

239

73

142, 295 limited to GBR 294 scale for people-and-nature

group, regional 67--8

semi-natural area 8, 206, see

interaction and stability

267

also natural

68--70, 72--3, 74

no single 314

neighborhood in city

sense of community 22, 72, 238--9 of place 12, 13, 67, 68, 72, 75, 239, 334--43

order, disruption of 344 78 scientist 12

Seoul, South Korea 200, 341,

services provided 70 system, informal 63

septic system 96, 101, 202

society 4, 5, 7, 23, 344

sewer 202, 297

socio-cultural pattern 11,

shrubs 25, 57, 109, 230, 256, 258 skyline conservation 157

51--78, see also

building on steep 109, 263 near city 3, 121, 157--8, 219, 220, 263, 349 building removed 263, 276 cool air drainage 104, 157 development and 43, 180, 216, 321 squatter housing 63, 68 vegetation cover 30, 42, 157--8, 180 by reservoir, ﬁre on 275

socioeconomic dimension 5, sodium and chloride 255--6, 257

beneﬁt of urban agriculture 77

254--5 source 14--15, 40 and sink area 319 of non-native species 91, 110, 176, 331 South Asia to Australia 114, 115, 171 space adding nature to 342--3 and economics 10, 59--66 for multiple resources 189--90

soil 24, 32, 87, 99--102, 299, 326--7

human afﬁnity for small 342

agricultural 42, 100--1, 151, 192

landscape or region as mid-size 316--17

conservation 34 natural 56

stability and size of 19, 316

protection or loss 192, 251 radioactivity in 320, 324

sterile or incomplete 342 spatial

water table close to 228

analysis 139--40

urban 84, 100--2

approach for long term

solutions 2, 4--5 applicability of 291--5 community, long-term 237

social

253 for water 189, 253,

culture, social 294

slope

273 for two or more issues

pattern 5, 51, 66--73, 74,

sensitivity, place-based 13 see Color Figure 35

for town/satellite city

73

at edge of community 298

245 arrangement 28, 29, 51, 61--4, 245, 315--25 in economics 66 of human objects 342--3

401

402

Index spatial (cont.) of land and people 14, 16--17, 76

extinction or loss 227, 325--30, 332, 334, 343

squatter community 42, 46, 63--4, 68--70, 202

of neighborhoods 68

farmland 151, 152

meaning of nature to 75

optimal 152, 243

feral 227

movement 63, 202

attribute 19, 20--6, 64, 119--25, 141 and ecological characteristic 206 of ecological importance 204, 205--6 to evaluate pattern and model 205--6, 214 evaluating

human control of 227 in isolated habitat 227, 327 keystone 83, 84, 227 K-selected and r-selected 90 movement 21--2, 92--3, 109--10, 145--7, 182, 229--30, 234, 331--2 multi-habitat 9 native 9

stability 33, 59--60, 61, 245, 273, 293, 344 agriculture and 150--2, 251, 252 challenges in 60 city and 237, 315, 318 culture and interaction for 74 ecosystem 84 emerald network and 328

urbanization 199,

naturalized 8

land-use providing 293

215--22, 347--8

persistence 40

of low-income

as index 206 combined 347, 351 in model 347 for planning and design 67--8, 271 suggesting regional planning 184 diffusion of people 199 feature 20, 23 micro-heterogeneity 228 model for GBR 247--8 models, simple 199, 204 pattern 17--18, 117 changing 198, 204--5 process 203, 240 scale 2, 17, 18--26, 67--8, 239, 245, 316

planning for important 299, 300 richness 24, 25, 88, 106--7 source of 165, 178 structure of a community 88 vulnerability 84, 227, 327 wetland 229 spokes design 171, 185, 201 sprawl 10, 17, 44, 64, 202, 298, 337 dispersed-sites model and 210, 222 low-density housing and 10, 46, 62, 201 prevention of 43

solutions 248

as process and form 10

unit, basic 82

social implication of

species, see also invasive, non-native, rare composition 88, 103 conservation 91, 94, 227 dispersal 232 dominance 88

70--2 solution for 222 as type of urbanization 34 as unsatisfactory pattern 10

community 68 market-gardening or home-gardening 152, 316 of a place 343 regional and landscape 14, 145, 270--2 and satellite-cities urbanization 221 of small space 316 for two interdependent components 92 and type of natural landscape 145 for water supply 163 stepping stone 39, 40, 147, 177, 231 for movement 109, 155 Stockholm, Sweden 46, 73, 181, 200, see Color Figure 36 stormwater 255--6, 257 basin 23, 97, 237 mitigation 23 pollutant 23, 44 runoff 24, 96, 237

Index from urban-region ring 283--5 and wastewater 255,

sulfur 85, 105, 265, 318

surface-water ﬂow 4

293--4

sustainability 47, 59--60, 61, 208, 316, 317--19

approach 6, 245 area interests in a 276 location 147--8, 236

163, see Color Figure 37

also impermeable

256, 257--8, 267, strategic

Tegucigalpa, Honduras 68,

surface runoff 230, see

Tehran, Iran see Color Figure 38 temperature 102, 103, 326--8, see also heat

sustainable development 60, 238, 335

theory, see also principle central place 242

for growth 273, 292

environment 14, 18, 60

hierarchy 242

underpass/overpass

natural area by city 73

land-mosaic 245--6

264 stream 120, 254--5, see also corridor, river/stream channelized or 24, 42, 189 corridor 23--5, 56, 110, 156, 230 and drainage area 231 extent of 255--6, 257 in green wedge 192 network 24, 111 protected vegetation 23--4, 111, 118, 272 order/size 24, 94 pollution 111 and small river 118 squatter housing near 68 system 37, 94, 256, 257 as water supply 160--1, 333 string of pearls 110, 250, 276, 331 strip development 152,

park system 234

urban planning 40

system or state 2, 65--6

analysis to develop 290

urban region 48--50 sustained

tidal portion of river 228

growth 61

wave, see tsunami

natural system near city

zone, freshwater 94--5

6 urban-region population 76 swale, vegetated 23 swamp 68--9, 93, 118, see also marsh, wetland system, 8, 107, see also aquifer, ecological, groundwater, network, parks city or region as 4, 15, 65, 318--19 economic and social 63 ﬂexibility provided by 270--2 of greenspaces and corridors 48, 146

Tijuana, Mexico 48, see also San Diego/Tijuana timescale 59--61 of sustainability 208 Tokyo 12, 107, 165, 178, 338 Tordera ﬂoodplain, lower 249, 251, 252, 256, 258--9 Tordera river system 259, 273 tourism 117, 140, 273, 275, 293, 326, 348, see also recreation town(s) 7, 76, 120, 186--8, 266--7, 273 center in metro area 43--4, 301--4

loop or circuit in 325

-centered region 302--4

plan footprints and

with commuter rail 301

urban region as 319

composition of 20 edge and cross-boundary

159--60, 168--71, 172,

sustainable 2, 65--6

174, 185, 201, 210,

transportation 60, 328

219, 221, 331

urban pipe 69

edge park for 266, 292

wind transport 8

growth of 261

suburbs 6--7, 14--15, 19, 78,

highway in 301

237, 301--4 successional habitat or species 88, 252

effects 5, 304

technological change 57, 60, 64

industry by 259 other towns and 302--4

403

404

Index town(s) (cont.)

corridors radial 110, 202, 235

outward spread 10, 170,

64, 69, 70

people in 185

urbanization along

planned 298--301

206, 209--10, 214,

total border length and

of food, long-distance 77

in urban-region ring 298

growth 261

-wide pattern for

infrastructure 62, 264

331 for water and wildlife 221 with vegetation 23, 72, 176--7, 295 in view of urbanization 277

megacity 339--40 modes 60, 70--1, 329 needs to ﬁt in

trafﬁc busy or congested 176, 297

250, 264, 294, 304,

216, 218, 221, 347--8

number of 186--8,

release to air 323

for people and wildlife

urbanization model

surrounding 304

planning 301, 302

295 location of 23, 264

241

regional approach by

toxic substance 96, 101, 105,

in Barcelona Region

squatter housing by

192, 209

194--7

underpass/overpass

agriculture 76--8, 99--102,

land-mosaic plan

151, 332, see also

264

agriculture,

network 11, 202

calming 22, 71, 234

nodes connected by 203

capacity, radial-route

pattern relative to 307--8, 310--11, 314

233

urban

cropland, farmland, urban region area 166 coastal 202, 286 key variable of 240

demand, meeting 22

planner 22

growth limited 263--4,

route 184--5, 192

culture 12

system, connectivity in

desert 41

269

60

noise 22, 23, 104, 233 highway bisecting town

system, sea-level rise and 328

304 truck 104 vehicular 233, 263--4

in urbanization 70--2 transportation/walkway radiating from park

volume/density/intensity

21, 210

104 trail 31, 75, 110, 177, see also walking/biking transit-oriented development (TOD) 46, 66, 72, 234, 328, see also under public transportation 232--4, 263--5, see also highway, public, rail and air-pollution model

tree 63, 103, 109 and shrub cover 25, 327

60, 70--1, 232--4, 329

ecology 47 economy 53, 61--3 edge/fringe 10 forest 56 greenspace, role of 166 growth beyond original 41--2 boundary 45, 47, 192,

truck farming, see market-gardening trafﬁc 104, 264 -transport center 5, 233, 264, 269, 294 tsunami 3, 98, 321, 343--5 urban 343, 345

200, 220 land and greenspace 206, 297 livability 42 metabolism 318 model linking transportation and land-use 203

203 alternative modes in 22,

district 238

Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia see Color Figure 39

people 97 pipe system 69

Index planner 13, 35 planning 5, 16, 27, 40, 245 region see urban region, urban-region regions commonalities 294 competition 197

as entity 116, 164, 183--5, 189--97 ﬂows/movements in 116 food in 141, 150--5 footprint of 65 governance 336, 337--8 greenhouse gas from 326

group of 7

growing 64

solution applicable to

impacts of 330

293--5 urbanization evaluated in 215--22 rural interaction 61--2

setting of 282--90 small 206 spatial attribute of 54, 64, 197 stability and ﬂexibility in 60 string of pearls in 331 subdivided 171 in two nations/states 289, 336

importance 272

wetlands in 256, 258

important area/site in

within a megalopolis

119 large and complex, too

289 urban-region

344

emeralds 331

links 16, 164

planning 245

tsunami 343, 345

major areas of 107

population sustained 76

water body 69

mapping 113--19

ring 7, 8, 10, 45, 102,

sustainability 61, 65--6, 315, 317--19

urban region 1, 6, 11--15, 26, 28, 34, 39, 55, 62, 106, 199, see also

megacity in 289 and metro area 190, 215, 290

183, 186--8, 206 agriculture in 150, 190--1

as system, plan and 319

area of 190, 206

analysis of 203

in national district 289

and biodiversity 332

biodiversity in 332

nature or natural land

cities in outer 209

urban-region

border-density in 193--5 boundary 6, 16, 116--17, 20, 140, 206, 290 building block of 295

in 141, 142--50, 219 output from 16 parks, pearls as 331 pattern or structure 7,

built area in 6--7

19--20, 239, 282--90,

climate change and

304--14, 317

response for 326 conservation outside of 330 constrained 206 in contrast to city 45 culture in 12, 294 characteristics of 81 nearby city and 289 distant change and 16, 90

people and nature in 222 plan for natural systems 336 planning 45--50, 167, 317, 338 political/administrative unit in 197 population 140 principle for 224

dynamic 198

in ring of cities 289

economics 61--3, 64,

solution for 295

294 ecoregion relative to 14

rare species in 330 scale 2, 13, 67--8

composition 19 inner 107, 108, 110, 195 land type 190, 191, 192 large patch in 166 and metro area/border 189--91, 283, 287--8, 316 new town in 298 outer 106, 107, 108, 111--12, 147, 177, 186, 195--7 site or resource in 189--91, 198 water runoff from 283--5 width 287, 288, 291 wildlife and 294 water supply 333

405

406

Index urban-to-rural gradient 47,

patterns 199, 200--2, 203, 218--19, 222, 241

urbanization 9--11, 17, 198--9, 204--5, 343, see also

215 planned metro area obscured by 289

attribute covered by 347 cause of 202

rate 208

as change 343

speciﬁc attribute in 219--20

concentric-zones 185, 201--2, 203, 206,

satellite-cities and 185--6, 192, 201, 209, 221,

241, 332

241, 332

connection types in 291 constrained 110, 181,

58 in urbanization model 221

physiography/land use

development and adjacent region 206

short- and long-term 55,

205--6, 211--15,

88, 106

in small sites 210--11

200

spread 4, 34, 152, 192,

disjointed 10

195, 198, 206

variability, low 219--20 variable of urban area, key 240 general and speciﬁc 205 variation 113 by sliced-donut types 285 on coastal city theme 286 vegetation, see also native, natural, semi-natural

dispersed 201--2, 206,

anticipation of 63

corridor, see natural

210--11, 241

and economics 66

degraded 8

effect on natural area

difference, ﬁne-scale 86

distant 200--2

73

effects 330

equal 200

emerald threatened by

form of 62

249

ﬂoodplain or riparian 230, 256, 257--8 in gully/channel 230, 256, 257, 258

evaluated 18, 38, 215--22

immigration and 202

and farm/natural land

low-density 54, 64, 192

marine 98

sequential 200

non-native species 8

10, 191--2

transportation 70--2,

framework for 203, 218

171

geometry key to 215

worst 211--15

beyond greenbelt 200

type 86 and water-supply 162, 291

and heat-island effect326

and string of pearls 276

ventilation system 104

highways/infrastructure/

and suburb 10

Vic, Spain 251, 260, 274, 275

threat and satellite city

village 7, 118, 120, 185, 188

transportation and

332

70--2, 171, 206, 200--1, 209--10, 241,

by town 192

261--2

water-protection in 261--2

landscape change 205--6 around large city 192

wildlife and 294

limits to 262--3

worst 241

by metro area border

spread of 10, 170, 188 vision 4, 5, 28, 345 for city 41, 42, 45 for GBR 246, 247--8 principles point to 248 public follows 345

USA 64, 77, 203, 337

volcano 188, 288, 319--20

value

walking 176--7, 221, see also

208--9 models 198--222, 347--8 near natural resource

cumulative, initial 281

recreation

land 235, 237

and park system 234

nuclei for 170, 283

of natural resource 55

path 21, 46, 71, 250,

park system in 261--2

of nature 74, 75

262

331

Index in transit-oriented development 72 walking/biking 72, 110, 177, 182 trail 43, 267, 291, 296

pollution 48, 320, 335 see also wastewater in dry area 44 ﬂow 118, 230--1, 256, 257, 258

waste assimilation 65--6 byproduct 54, 57--8 258--9

input and output of 32, 318 inter-basin transfer 333

disposal, water for 332

for nature and us 253--6

food 318

pattern for 307, 309--10,

solid, disposal/recycling 111, 116, 120 wastewater in estuary 69 from ﬂushing toilet 69 human 202, 255--6, 257 input and output of 96, 318 to nearby gully or stream 255, 257 and stormwater 255, 256, 257--8, 267, 293--4 treatment facility 111, 116, 120 water 138--63, 279--80 Barcelona and 248, 268 bay/harbor polluted 286 body 93

313--14

table 228, 276, 334 velocity 4, 94 wealth 52, 63, 64, 66, 68, 110 weather event, extreme 326, 329 wedge 200, 208--9 eliminated in model 220 green 46, 110, 170, 180--3, 184--5, 192, 200, 220, 221

pipe 254, 255--6, 257

in Stockholm 73, 208

in plan 281

urbanization beyond

for power/cooling/waste 332--3 quality 96, 255--6, 257, 280 poor 42, 120 stream 24

206, 208 West to East Asia 114 wetlands 32, 75, 92, 93--4, 121, 149--50, 227--9, 256, 257--9, 349

quantity 96--7, 280

and biodiversity 269

recharge to groundwater

coastal/tidal 97--8, 228

334 in urban region 141, 155--63, 334 saltwater 97, 119, 254, 333 scarcity 78, 253--4, 255--6, 325--34, 343 and sewer service 297 soil capacity for 299 strategy 253

degraded 33 protection 41 restoration 32--3, 229, 256, 258--9, 272, 292 scarcity 32, 256, 258, 333 species 33, 228, 229, 256, 257, 258--9 stormwater in 5, 255--6,

in/near city 158--9,

supply 43, 63, 160--3, 333

257, 267, 272

160, 166, 287

climate change and

and urbanization 217

as constraint 200 metro area without major 289 pipe or channel to 254 and region size 190 clean 254, 269, 283--4 demand, reducing 253 dirty 255, 257

326 drainage area for 117, 347, 350

uses of 56, 110, 227, 149, 238 wildlife 4, 106, 264

in disaster 320

and air pollution 323

reservoir as 259

avoidance zone 171

unsafe 255, 257

corridor disrupted

and urbanization 217, 261--2 protection 45, 161--2, 261--2, 291, 333

185--6 and ﬁre 320 movement 25, 48, 152, 221

407

408

Index wildlife (cont.) strip development 221

and urbanization 294 see also under/overpass wind 103--4, 262--3, 286, 322,

171 rest stop for 231 from nearby natural area 44 reintroduction 275 residents and 296 sustained 111

woodlawn area 8 woods 143, 154

334

gap length and 231 highway and 23, 72,

Woodlands, Texas, The 299

zone

wooded area, large 45

of inﬂuence 203

corridor 25

outside boundary 29

landscape 7, 143, 144--5,

reconnection 250

154, see also forest/woodland patch 25, 142, 146--7, 154--5

see also exurban, peri-urban, riparian, avoidance zoning 62